On Nov. 4, 2025, the United States circulated a draft U.N. Security Council resolution proposing an International Stabilization Force (ISF) for Gaza, a document marked "sensitive but unclassified" intended to guide Council negotiations. The draft frames the ISF as a means to demilitarize Gaza by targeting military and terror infrastructure, and links its operations to a Board of Peace; a U.S. official described the force as "an enforcement force and not a peacekeeping force." Negotiations among Security Council members are under way ahead of a vote expected soon.
U.S. sponsors presented the ISF proposal against a backdrop of intensified concern about the remilitarization of Gaza following the Oct. 7, 2023 attack. The circulated draft assigns the ISF a range of responsibilities that include securing Gaza’s borders, protecting civilians, and training police forces, while also authorizing actions aimed at dismantling military and terrorist capabilities. The text would vest participating nations with broad authority in Gaza through the end of 2027 and connects reconstruction oversight with international financial institutions, naming the World Bank as supervisor of reconstruction funds.
The draft’s linkage of military and civilian tasks, together with the U.S. characterization of the ISF as an enforcement entity, signals a mandate that would go beyond traditional U.N. peacekeeping practices focused on consent and neutrality. Backers argue the approach is designed to prevent the reconstitution of armed groups and provide security conditions necessary for rebuilding, while critics caution that extensive foreign powers operating with broad authority in Gaza could resemble a form of external guardianship and raise sovereignty and accountability concerns.
Diplomatic friction is already shaping the route to a vote. Security Council negotiations will determine the final text, including which countries may participate and under what constraints. Some Muslim-majority nations have indicated a willingness to contribute to stabilization efforts but have limited their support to roles that do not involve direct combat against Hamas, according to the circulated framework and subsequent diplomatic discussions. Israel, however, has objected to potential Turkish involvement in the force, a position that is expected to factor heavily into Council bargaining over contributors and operational modalities.
The draft’s designation of the World Bank as the supervisor of reconstruction funds reflects an attempt to separate security tasks from economic rebuilding and to ensure international oversight of financing. Proponents say such oversight could enhance transparency and donor confidence; opponents and civil society observers warn that placing reconstruction under international control might institutionalize external influence over Gaza’s future and complicate political arrangements between local authorities and international actors.
How the Security Council reconciles competing priorities — demilitarization, civilian protection, reconstruction, and respect for local governance — will determine the ISF’s final mandate and composition. The draft’s end-2027 time horizon establishes a multiyear scope that supporters argue is necessary to stabilize the territory and complete initial reconstruction phases, while skeptics point to the risk of prolonged foreign military presence and the difficulties of exiting an enforcement role.
Negotiations among Council members are continuing and are expected to precede a formal vote in the coming days. If adopted, the resolution would authorize participating nations to operate in Gaza under the outlined mandate through the end of 2027, with the World Bank overseeing reconstruction expenditures. Observers say the outcome will hinge on agreement both over the force’s enforcement powers and the roster of countries willing to serve under the constraints specified in the draft; any amendments during Council deliberations could reshape the balance between security tasks and political oversight.