Key Highlights:
- Hamas rejects UN Security Council Resolution 2803 authorizing international stabilization force in Gaza, calling it “international trusteeship”
- UN Security Council passed US-backed resolution 13-0 with Russia and China abstaining on November 17, 2025
- Resolution endorses Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan including deployment of multinational force and path to Palestinian statehood
Opening Overview
Hamas has firmly rejected the United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing the deployment of an international stabilization force in Gaza, declaring that the UN Gaza resolution fails to respect Palestinian rights and imposes unwanted external control over the territory. The militant group’s rejection came hours after the UN Security Council voted 13-0 in favor of a US-drafted resolution on November 17, 2025, with only Russia and China abstaining from the vote. The UN Gaza resolution, formally designated as Resolution 2803, endorses President Donald Trump’s comprehensive 20-point Gaza peace plan and authorizes the establishment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) to oversee security, demilitarization, and reconstruction in the war-torn enclave.
In a strongly worded statement, Hamas declared that the UN Gaza resolution “does not meet the level of our Palestinian people’s political and humanitarian demands and rights,” signaling a potential obstacle to implementing the peace plan despite international backing. The Gaza peace plan represents one of the most ambitious international efforts to end the conflict that has claimed over 67,000 Palestinian lives since October 7, 2023, according to Gaza Ministry of Health figures. Hamas specifically objected to provisions within the UN Gaza resolution requiring disarmament of Palestinian groups and the establishment of what it characterized as “international trusteeship” over Gaza, raising questions about the viability of the resolution’s implementation.
Hamas official Osama Hamdan: "The UN Security Council resolution imposes international guardianship over Gaza and seeks to recreate the occupation, stripping Palestinians of their right to resist. The resolution contains no clear language supporting the establishment of a… pic.twitter.com/LVVcKCGf7d
— ℂ𝕙𝕖 𝔾𝕦𝕖𝕧𝕒𝕣𝕒 ★ (@cheguwera) November 18, 2025
Hamas Opposition to International Force Deployment
Hamas has categorically rejected the UN Gaza resolution, centering its opposition on what it describes as an infringement on Palestinian sovereignty and self-determination. The organization released a comprehensive statement criticizing the UN Gaza resolution for imposing “an international trusteeship on the Gaza Strip, which our people, its forces, and its constituent groups reject.” Hamas specifically condemned the mandate given to the International Stabilization Force under the UN Gaza resolution, which includes the disarmament of Palestinian armed groups—a provision the organization views as stripping Palestinians of their right to resistance. The statement emphasized that the UN Gaza resolution fails to address core Palestinian political and humanitarian demands, suggesting a fundamental disconnect between international diplomatic efforts and Palestinian expectations.
- Hamas declared any international military presence authorized by the UN Gaza resolution would constitute “a violation of our national sovereignty” and potentially become a party to the ongoing conflict
- The organization maintains that resistance “by all means is a legitimate right” and has stated it will never disarm under international pressure imposed by the UN Gaza resolution
- Palestinian factions issued a collective statement calling on Arab states to reject the UN Gaza resolution, indicating broader opposition beyond Hamas
The rejection represents a significant challenge to implementing Trump’s peace plan, as cooperation from Gaza’s de facto rulers would be essential for any international force deployment authorized under the UN Gaza resolution. Hamas indicated that any foreign troops entering Gaza under the UN Gaza resolution would be viewed as hostile actors rather than peacekeepers, raising concerns about potential armed resistance to ISF deployment. The organization’s position highlights the fundamental tension between international stabilization efforts and Palestinian aspirations for self-governance without external military oversight. Despite Hamas rejecting the UN Gaza resolution, the Palestinian Authority has welcomed the measure and called for its rapid implementation, revealing deep divisions within Palestinian political leadership.
UN Security Council Resolution 2803 Details and Voting
The UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2803 on November 17, 2025, during its 10,046th meeting, with overwhelming support from 13 member states and no opposing votes. The UN Gaza resolution received backing from Algeria, Denmark, France, Greece, Guyana, South Korea, Pakistan, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Somalia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, while permanent members China and Russia abstained from voting.
US Ambassador Mike Waltz characterized the vote as “historic and constructive,” emphasizing that the international community was “charting a new course in the Middle East for Israelis and Palestinians.” The UN Gaza resolution endorses Trump’s comprehensive 20-point Gaza peace plan and authorizes the establishment of a Board of Peace as a transitional governance administration with international legal personality.
- The UN Gaza resolution authorizes both the Board of Peace and International Stabilization Force until December 31, 2027, subject to further Security Council action
- The resolution passed after intensive negotiations involving multiple draft revisions between November 3-17, 2025, with the US making concessions to address concerns from China, Russia, and other members
- Eight Arab and Muslim-majority countries—Qatar, Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Jordan, and Turkey—jointly supported the US-drafted resolution
The UN Gaza resolution welcomes the establishment of the Board of Peace, which will be chaired by President Trump and tasked with overseeing Gaza’s reconstruction and establishing a technocratic Palestinian committee for day-to-day administration. The text authorizes the Board of Peace to establish the International Stabilization Force under unified command acceptable to the BoP, with forces contributed by participating states in close consultation with Egypt and Israel.
Arab and Muslim countries that expressed interest in providing troops for the international force had signaled that UN Security Council authorization was essential for their participation, making the resolution’s passage crucial for implementation. The UN Gaza resolution includes language stating that conditions may be established “for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood” after the Palestinian Authority completes its reform program and Gaza’s redevelopment advances. Russia’s abstention reflected concerns about what Moscow described as “international trusteeship” and insufficient Palestinian participation in governance decisions, while China’s abstention signaled reservations about the Board of Peace structure.
International Stabilization Force Mandate and Structure
The International Stabilization Force authorized under the UN Gaza resolution represents an unprecedented multinational security deployment designed to transform Gaza into what Trump’s plan describes as a “deradicalized terror-free zone.” The ISF has been granted a comprehensive mandate under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, authorizing the use of “all necessary measures” consistent with international law to accomplish its objectives.
The force’s primary responsibilities include monitoring the ceasefire, securing border areas, protecting civilians and humanitarian operations, supporting demilitarization processes, training Palestinian police units, and undertaking additional tasks necessary to support the comprehensive peace plan. US Ambassador Waltz explained that the stabilization force would be “tasked with securing the area, supporting the demilitarization of Gaza, dismantling the terrorist infrastructure, removing weapons, and ensuring the safety of Palestinian civilians.”
- The ISF mission envisions a 20,000-troop enforcement deployment by 2026, though specific troop commitments remain under negotiation
- Countries reportedly interested in contributing include Egypt, Qatar, UAE, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Australia, Malaysia, Canada, France, and Cyprus
- Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that no Turkish forces be deployed as part of the ISF, highlighting tensions over force composition
The force will work in close coordination with Egypt and Israel, with Israeli Defense Forces withdrawing from Gaza “based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization” agreed between the IDF, ISF, guarantors, and the United States. A Civil-Military Coordination Center under US Central Command leadership has been established to facilitate the flow of humanitarian, logistical, and security assistance from international counterparts into Gaza.
The ISF’s demilitarization mandate includes overseeing the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups through an internationally funded buyback and reintegration program, verified by independent observers. As of late October 2025, approximately 25 US personnel were serving in the region in coordination and oversight roles for the ISF, which is being constructed following the ceasefire that took effect on October 10, 2025.
The stabilization force faces significant operational challenges, including the absence of confirmed troop commitments from key Arab states, with Saudi Arabia and the UAE reportedly declining to contribute forces as of late October 2025. The ISF’s success depends heavily on cooperation from local Palestinian authorities and the willingness of international partners to commit personnel to what many view as a high-risk security environment. Reports suggest that Azeri and Indonesian troops may form the core of the ISF, though formal deployment agreements have not been finalized. The UN Gaza resolution mandates six-monthly progress reports to the Security Council, providing oversight of implementation milestones.
Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Peace Plan Framework
President Donald Trump’s comprehensive 20-point Gaza peace plan forms the foundation of the UN Gaza resolution and outlines an ambitious roadmap for ending the conflict that has devastated Gaza since October 7, 2023. The plan establishes three distinct phases: immediate ceasefire and humanitarian actions, demilitarization and security measures, and governance and reconstruction. Under phase one, the plan requires Hamas to release all Israeli hostages within 72 hours of Israel’s public acceptance, in exchange for Israel’s commitment to immediately cease military operations and withdraw to agreed boundaries. The framework stipulates that Gaza will be transformed into a “deradicalized terror-free zone” that poses no threat to neighboring regions, with redevelopment focused on benefiting residents who have endured significant hardship.
- The plan requires Hamas to accept complete disarmament, exclusion from Gaza’s governance, and dismantling of military infrastructure including tunnels and weapons production facilities
- Israel commits to staged withdrawal from Gaza, release of 250 Palestinian life-sentence prisoners plus 1,700 Gazans detained after October 7, 2023, and a commitment not to annex the territory
- Hamas members who commit to peaceful coexistence and weapon disarmament will receive amnesty, with safe passage to receiving nations for those wishing to exit Gaza
The second phase of Trump’s Gaza peace plan focuses on demilitarization under international supervision, with the International Stabilization Force progressively assuming security responsibilities as Israeli forces withdraw. The plan calls for establishing an interim technocratic government comprising Palestinian and international experts under the oversight of the Board of Peace, which will eventually cede control to a reformed Palestinian Authority.
Immediate humanitarian aid provisions align with the January 19, 2025 humanitarian assistance agreement, including infrastructure rehabilitation for water, electricity, and sewage systems, hospital and bakery restoration, and deployment of equipment to clear debris and reopen roads. The framework includes language establishing that “conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood” after the Palestinian Authority completes its reform program and Gaza’s redevelopment advances.
The peace plan received backing from eight Arab and Muslim-majority nations including Qatar, Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Jordan, and Turkey, who issued a joint statement urging Security Council adoption. Mediators from the US, Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey are designated to facilitate what Trump described as achieving “strong, durable, and everlasting peace” following ceasefire establishment. The plan stipulates that no Palestinians will be militarily forced to leave Gaza, addressing concerns about forced displacement that have circulated throughout the conflict. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been named among the members of the Board of Peace, which will head the transitional governance structure.
Closing Assessment
The stark divergence between international diplomatic consensus and Hamas’s rejection of the UN Gaza resolution underscores the profound challenges facing implementation of Trump’s ambitious peace framework. While 13 Security Council members supported the UN Gaza resolution, Hamas’s categorical opposition to international force deployment and disarmament provisions threatens to transform the stabilization mission into a potential flashpoint rather than a peacekeeping operation.
The contrasting responses from Hamas and the Palestinian Authority—with the latter welcoming the UN Gaza resolution—reveal deep fractures within Palestinian political leadership that could complicate unified governance structures envisioned under the Board of Peace. The abstentions by Russia and China, though not vetoes, signal continuing geopolitical divisions over Gaza’s future and concerns about what Moscow characterized as Western-imposed trusteeship arrangements.
The UN Gaza resolution’s success hinges on resolving critical operational uncertainties, including securing concrete troop commitments from Arab and Muslim-majority nations, achieving Hamas cooperation or neutralization, and coordinating complex Israeli withdrawal timelines with demilitarization milestones. With over 67,000 Palestinians killed during two years of conflict according to Gaza Health Ministry data, the humanitarian imperative for successful implementation remains urgent.
The international community now faces the formidable task of translating diplomatic authorization into tangible security improvements and reconstruction progress, while navigating Hamas’s declared resistance to what it views as external military occupation. Whether the UN Gaza resolution represents a genuine turning point toward peace or merely another diplomatic framework that collapses under the weight of competing interests will become evident in the coming months as deployment and implementation efforts unfold.
