The Virtuous City Vision and the Confederation for Canaan-Full Vision
A Political Framework to End The 600-Day Nightmare
Executive Summary
This document proposes a political and philosophical framework to address the need for a new order following the Israel-Hamas War. It offers a divine template: a morally and intellectually grounded vision for breaking the generational deadlock between Israelis and Palestinians and reimagining Gaza as a place of resilience and renewal, where spiritual and intellectual life can flourish.
The proposal begins by acknowledging the most likely future: Gaza, twenty years from now, as a depopulated and devastated enclave, governed by fractured authorities, trapped in permanent reconstruction, and forgotten by the world. Against this trajectory of despair, the framework puts forth two interwoven initiatives:
The Virtuous City of Gaza: Inspired by the medieval Islamic philosopher Al-Farabi, this vision envisions Gaza as a sacred civic aspiration, transcending humanitarian recovery towards moral renewal and civilizational healing. The Virtuous City is a metaphysical, spirtual, and moral orientation rooted in Islamic tradition, yet universal in its ideals. It calls for Gaza to become a center of education, justice, and human dignity: a city built for sa‘āda, or human flourishing in both this world and the next.
The Canaan Peace Framework: A multilateral diplomatic and transitional framework designed to coordinate reconstruction, stabilize ceasefires, and create the conditions for Israeli disengagement and Palestinian governance reform. The Framework is not a supranational government; it is a pragmatic structure for organizing the set of states already involved in the conflict and its aftermath. Through mechanisms such as phased disengagement, a Compact of Free Association between Palestine and the United States, and the establishment of a House of Wisdom and Peace in Gaza, the Confederation aims to reduce violence, realign interests, and support long-term transformation.
This plan does not diminish the profound asymmetry of power between Israel and Palestine. It recognizes the structural domination of one nation over another, the legacy of occupation, and the existential fears that drive entrenched militarism. But it also insists that without a framework that rehumanizes and reconciles both peoples, and dares to imagine something better than permanent warfare, no resolution will hold.
The Virtuous City Vision cannot be implemented in only a decade. It is a multi-generational project: a moral alternative to annihilation and stagnation. It does not attempt to peddle false hope or naivety, but attempts to offer structured hope, grounded in philosophy, faith, and the belief that even in the darkest conditions, the seeds of a more prosperous future can be sown.
Disclaimer
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most complex, emotionally charged, and deeply entrenched disputes in human history. It is a conflict defined by trauma, historical grievances, existential fears, and generational suffering on all sides. This peace plan does not pretend to offer a perfect or universally accepted solution, nor does it seek to diminish the pain, loss, and injustice experienced by any party involved.
This document represents an amateur yet earnest attempt at imagining a creative path forward that the nations could implement. This path acknowledges the impossible contradictions of this conflict and dares to engage with them, rather than evade them. It is the result of extensive research, reflection, and a deliberate effort to feel and understand the full spectrum of emotions that an outside observer might experience: grief, anger, frustration, empathy, hope, and despair.
I have done my best to approach this subject with humility, knowing that no outsider can truly grasp the lived reality of those directly affected. At the same time, I recognize that being an outsider grants a unique vantage point, one that is unbound by the red lines and entrenched narratives that have made progress so elusive.
My motivation for protecting the Jewish national home stems from their incalculable contributions to humanity, which have enriched countless fields such as mathematics, science, philosophy, literature, and morality. These contributions are deeply tied to their collective identity and survival as a people. The preservation of a Jewish national home is crucial to ensuring that this legacy continues, as their ability to thrive and contribute to global progress is inherently linked to their survival.
I advocate for the Palestinians because they endure one of the harshest systems of oppression today. No nation deserves to endure the horrors of colonization, the forced subjugation of its people, or the erasure of its sovereignty. Daily mass killings, displacement, disenfranchisement, and the denial of basic rights have imposed deep insecurity and suffering on generations of Palestinians. This systemic injustice stifles their potential and denies them the dignity every human deserves. My goal is to provide an alternative that enables Palestinians to rebuild their communities, pursue their aspirations, and contribute fully to the global community.
The Israeli and Palestinian peoples each have a deep historical connection to the land, and both deserve the right to live in a safe and secure homeland. This means recognizing the legitimate aspirations of both nations: Israelis need a secure and defensible state to preserve their national identity and ensure the safety of their citizens, while Palestinians have the right to self-determination, free from occupation, with the ability to build a peaceful and prosperous future.
Working within the system to drive positive change is neither glamorous nor popular, but it is necessary, and that was my goal. Someone had to put forth a creative, strategic vision that operates within the existing political and diplomatic reality, rather than simply rejecting them to overthrow the system.
I welcome engagement in the spirit of inquiry, honesty, and a shared commitment to ending this cycle of violence. The burden of maintaining the sanctity of life belongs to all of us.
Introduction
I have had my heart, mind, and soul shattered by the October 7th attack and subsequent planetary devastation of the Gaza Strip during the Israel-Hamas War. I wish to present a historically and culturally inspired strategic vision, The Virtuous City Vision, which I developed while researching the Israel-Palestinian Conflict.
This framework proposes three key initiatives:
Reimagining the Gaza Strip as the Virtuous City of Gaza, inspired by Abu Nasr Muhammad al-Farabi’s Political and Philosophical Treatise, Mabadi Ara Ahl al Madina al Fadila (The Opinions of the People of the Virtuous City);
Establishing a modern, internationally backed House of Wisdom and Peace to rebuild Gaza into the Intellectual and Cultural Nexus of the Middle East;
Creating a pathway to the Canaan Multinational Confederation as a diplomatic platform to implement this vision and ameliorate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Confederation would operate for at least a generation, corresponding to a renewable hudna, to facilitate the development of a sustainable governing arrangement for both the Israeli and Palestinian nations. The Confederation would begin its life as an Alliance to Stabilize Canaan as a roadmap to build trust between the parties.
Al-Farabi’s Virtuous City: A Greco-Islamic Vision of Human Flourishing
Abu Nasr Muhammad al-Farabi, a 10th-century Islamic philosopher known as the ‘Second Teacher’ after Aristotle, profoundly influenced medieval Islamic thought by synthesizing Greek and Islamic traditions. His seminal work, MabādiʾĀrāʾAhl al-Madīna al-Fāḍila (The Principles of the Opinions of the People of the Virtuous City)1, envisions an ideal society governed by justice, moral integrity, intellectual and spiritual growth.
The Virtuous City’s ultimate goal is sa‘ada (human flourishing) achieved through intellectual development, spiritual perfection, and harmonious governance. Education is paramount, cultivating man’s rational faculties, aligning individuals with the divine order, and fostering personal and collective flourishing through wisdom, virtue, and justice.
For Al-Farabi, the city-state is essential to human development, providing a minimal structure for individuals to cultivate their intellectual, moral, and spiritual capacities. As inherently social beings, humans thrive within a community that mirrors the divine and cosmic order, where each citizen, like an organ in a body, plays a unique role in maintaining harmony and collective well-being. At its core, the Virtuous City is led by a Virtuous ruler who synthesizes Plato’s philosopher-king with the Islamic concept of prophecy, governing with justice, reason, and a deep understanding and appreciation of universal truths and spiritual wisdom.
By applying these principles, Gaza can be reimagined as a city rebuilt from destruction and as The Virtuous City—a model of resilience, knowledge, and just governance.
The Virtuous City of Gaza: The Divine Template for Renewal
The Gaza Strip lies on the heart of the geopolitical and spiritual fault line between the Western and Islamic worlds. Its devastation demands not just reconstruction, but a reimagining rooted in both its geopolitical location and symbolic weight. The Virtuous City is the divine template for Gaza’s rebirth, a singular moral and philosophical framework drawn from Al-Farabi’s synthesis of Greco-Roman thought and the Islamic tradition. It offers a unifying path that bridges ideological, religious, and national divides for reconstructing a thriving society rooted in intellectual, moral, and spiritual growth.
This vision is not a rigid ideology, neither secular nor Islamist, but a path forward, capable of bridging divides within Palestinian nationalism and the Israeli and Palestinian nations. It serves as an aspirational vision for sustained, long-term efforts despite Gaza’s history of devastation, political division, and economic hardship.
Building the Virtuous City of Gaza will require unprecedented international engagement and cooperation. But by providing a universalist goal, it plants a seed of hope for future generations of Palestinians, Israelis, and global partners to rebuild the Gaza Strip as a center of knowledge, prosperity, peace, and freedom. More than just a blueprint for reconstruction, the Virtuous City ensures that its people thrive in both this world and the next, fostering a society where wisdom, justice, and faith guide the path to renewal and enduring fulfillment.
The House of Wisdom and Peace: Building Gaza as a Global Intellectual and Cultural Hub
The heart of the proposed Virtuous City of Gaza will be the House of Wisdom and Peace, a Pan-Arab and international institution designed to anchor Palestinian statehood through knowledge, culture, and diplomacy. Inspired by Baghdad’s legendary Bayt al-Hikmah, it will rekindle the Arab world’s legacy of intellectual leadership while ensuring that governance, economic policy, and cultural identity are built on firm intellectual and institutional footing. Much like Andalusia at its height, this vision seeks to reclaim the spirit of a Middle East Golden Age, where diverse scholars, artists, and leaders shape a flourishing and interconnected world.
Palestinians have long treated education as resistance. Under occupation, they still opened tent schools and ran free literacy programs, reaching a 97% literacy rate. After the destruction of schools, universities, and the infrastructure of hope, the House of Wisdom will immortalize the spirit that made learning a national lifeline. In doing so, it will restore educational justice to a people for whom learning has always been both a right and a form of resilience.
Beyond its academic and economic engine role, the House of Wisdom will serve as a beacon of reconciliation, revitalizing the Judeo-Islamic2 tradition and fostering interfaith dialogue and intellectual exchange. Historically, Jewish and Muslim scholars engaged in a shared intellectual tradition, with thinkers like Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, Saadia Gaon, Judah Halevi, Abraham ibn Ezra, and Maimonides contributing to a knowledge ecosystem that shaped both the Islamic and Western worlds3. The House of Wisdom will restore this historical legacy, providing a platform for cross-cultural collaboration, theological discourse, and policy innovation, positioning Palestine as an intellectual leader in the region.
The House of Wisdom will serve as the beating heart of Gaza’s rebirth—uniting Arab states, global academic institutions, and visionary entrepreneurs to position Palestine at the forefront of technological innovation, economic renewal, and interfaith diplomacy. As both a cultural and diplomatic nexus, it will elevate Arab and Islamic artistic traditions, host global exhibitions, and convene international policy dialogues. Anchoring a Palestinian-inclusive “Gaza Riviera,” it will drive regional integration and sustainable development while igniting the Palestinian economic revival.
Rearchitecting Reality: Addressing Gaza’s Humanitarian Crisis and Post-Conflict Security
No long-term vision can succeed without first addressing the immediate humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the broader political needs of the Palestinian people. Food, water, medical care, and basic infrastructure must be restored before any political framework can take hold. Beyond humanitarian relief, there must also be economic stabilization, political restructuring, and security guarantees to ensure that rebuilding is not simply another fragile ceasefire before the next war.
At the same time, the legitimate post–October 7th security concerns of the Israeli state and its citizens must be addressed as part of any comprehensive solution. The scale and trauma of the attack shattered the Israeli public’s confidence in prior frameworks and underscored the dangers of leaving unresolved security gaps in Gaza. A renewed international effort must therefore balance urgent humanitarian action with robust, enforceable security arrangements that provide credible deterrence against renewed hostilities.
Meeting the daily survival needs of the Palestinian population while reassuring Israelis that Gaza will no longer be used as a base for armed attacks is a necessary but not sufficient prerequisite for breaking the cycle of devastation. Without addressing both populations’ most immediate fears and needs, any long-term framework will collapse under the weight of mistrust and unmet obligations.
Expanding the Abraham Accords
The most straightforward approach would be to expand the Abraham Accords to integrate Gaza’s reconstruction into the broader normalization process. This would align Israel, Palestine, and regional states under a shared goal of peace, prosperity, and international integration while facilitating reconstruction, economic development, and deeper regional cooperation.
The Canaan Peace Framework: A Phased Approach to Ben-Gurion’s Vision for Peace
The Abraham Accords marked a historic shift in regional diplomacy, fostering cooperation between Israel and several Arab states. Yet, they remain insufficient to address the structural causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the humanitarian devastation in Gaza. To fill this gap, we propose a time-limited, multilateral coordination framework: the Canaan Peace Framework, beginning with an Alliance for the Stabilization of Canaan and offering an option to evolve into a Confederation for Canaan after trust is established. This framework transforms fragmented efforts into a coherent, generational platform for peace, rooted in shared interests and the sanctity of human life.
Framework Overview
The Canaan Peace Framework is not a supranational government or new state entity. It is a structured coalition of states and institutions—Israel, the Palestinian Authority (PA, evolving into a state), Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, U.S., EU, UN, neutral mediators (e.g., Norway), and religious leaders—designed to manage the conflict and build a sustainable peace over 30 years. It formalizes existing mediation, reconstruction, and security efforts into a cohesive platform, promoting strategic alignment, accountability, and long-term stabilization.
Phase 1 (Years 1–10): Alliance for the Stabilization of Canaan: A voluntary alliance with a Central Coordinating Secretariat and robust protocols that deliver binding commitments, overcoming sovereignty concerns while ensuring Gaza’s reconstruction, PA-led governance, and prevention of unilateral Israeli actions (e.g., bombing Arab-trained forces or International Peacekeepers). It ties Israel’s regional integration to Palestinian statehood progress, meeting Saudi Arabia’s demands and enabling conditional normalization for Arab states outside the Abraham Accords.
Phase 2 (Years 11–20): Option for Confederation for Canaan: If trust is established (e.g., Gaza stability, ceasefire adherence), the alliance may evolve into a semi-permanent Confederation for Canaan, a consensus-driven negotiation table with a generational mandate, formalizing coordination without a central enforcing council.
Phase 3 (Years 21–30): Mature Confederation: Finalizes Palestinian statehood, phases out peacekeepers, concludes a peace treaty, and institutionalizes religious reconciliation, ensuring lasting regional cooperation.
Participation is voluntary and modular, allowing states to contribute based on resources and interests (e.g., Egypt’s security training, UAE’s funding, U.S. mediation). The framework builds on the Abraham Accords while addressing their limitations, offering a pathway to Palestinian statehood and conditional normalization.
The Core Mission: Breaking the Cycle of Genocidal Violence To Prioritize The Sanctity of Human Life
The framework’s overriding goal is to minimize future deaths and human suffering, ensuring that peace efforts are guided by the sanctity of life rather than short-term political interests or zero-sum calculations.
A secondary goal is to confront the entrenched militarism and moral erosion within both societies, explicitly acknowledging that, after more than a century of violence, occupation, and trauma, both many Israelis and Palestinians have developed mutually dehumanizing worldviews that, at their extremes, contain genocidal impulses.
This is not to suggest moral equivalence or to obscure the vast disparities in power, military capacity, or structural control between the two nations. The lived realities of Palestinians under occupation, blockade, and displacement are fundamentally different from those of Israelis with a sovereign state and one of the most powerful militaries in the world. These asymmetries must be named clearly.
At the same time, any viable political framework must reckon with the deep cultural wounds and fear-based ideologies that fuel this cycle of violence. It must cultivate the conditions for moral and institutional renewal: rooted in human dignity, mutual recognition, and the sacred value of life. Without this moral dimension, no political arrangement can endure.
A Historic Opportunity For Regional Reconciliation
During Israel’s formative years, David Ben-Gurion proposed an Arab federation that included Israel4, but political realities at the time made this impossible. Today, the regional landscape has shifted, with Arab states accepting Israel’s permanence and seeking opportunities for economic, political, and security cooperation. The Canaan Peace Framework embodies this evolution, offering a neutral, pragmatic approach that adapts Ben-Gurion’s concept to resolving the Israel-Hamas war.
The Choice of ‘Canaan’
The choice of the name “Canaan” is deliberate; it revives a historical identity that predates the modern Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While “Israel” and “Palestine” are names weighed down by a century of political division, Canaan references a shared historical and cultural heritage. By reclaiming a term rooted in a land shared by multiple civilizations, the Confederation creates a framework for cooperation based on common history rather than exclusionary national identities.
Modern DNA research suggests that both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples are loose descendants of the ancient Canaanites5, whose legacy still echoes in the region's languages, place names, and family lineages. By reclaiming this more ancient and inclusive identity, a Canaan diplomatic framework promotes a new cultural of cooperation on a deeper, common ancestry that transcends modern nationalistic divisions.
The name Canaan draws not only from the ancient land shared by Israelis and Palestinians, but also from a modern intellectual tradition that sought to reimagine identity beyond tribal and religious boundaries. The Neo-Canaanite movement of the mid-20th century promoted a form of pan-Semitic nationalism, calling for a renewed Hebrew identity rooted in the Levant and a cultural kinship with neighboring Arab peoples. Though primarily literary and symbolic, the movement envisioned a future where Israelis and Arabs recognized their shared Semitic heritage and built a common regional destiny. This peace plan revives that spirit as a practical framework for coexistence, justice, and mutual flourishing.
A Platform for Historical Reconciliation, Interfaith Cooperation, and the Abrahamic Tradition
The Canaan Peace Framework will also serve as a mechanism for long-term regional reconciliation. By providing a neutral platform for interfaith dialogue and historical truth and reconciliation, it can address long-standing grievances and foster a commitment to shared heritage. As a multilateral entity representing Muslim, Jewish, and Christian nations, the Framework will also play a key role in holy site stewardship, interfaith cooperation, and regional security initiatives.
A long-term objective of the Alliance/Confederation will be to formalize the Abrahamic tradition as a framework for coexistence and shared spiritual heritage. Throughout history, the Abrahamic faiths have influenced one another in profound ways, shaping philosophy, law, and ethics across civilizations. The Confederation will work to foster this greater tradition, ensuring that religious reconciliation is not just a political necessity but a cultural and theological movement that restores a sense of shared destiny among the Children of Abraham — for example, by encouraging the development of interfaith holidays that honor shared prophets and ethical teachings as living expressions of that common heritage.
New religious covenants will need to be created under the framework of the Abrahamic tradition for Holy Site maintenance and worship, and while this is a profound challenge in an era without prophets, modern political institutions and representative leadership will have to serve as the substitute mechanism for articulating these sacred commitments.
A Framework For Multilateral Disengagement
The Alliance to Stabilize Canaan provides a structured vehicle for the phased and internationally supported disengagement of Israeli forces from occupied territories—beginning, by necessity and logic, with the Gaza Strip. As the most isolated and devastated of the occupied areas, Gaza stands as the natural starting point for this process, subject to the terms of the first hudna agreement negotiated among Alliance members. This initial hudna will lay the foundation for demilitarization, humanitarian reconstruction, and the introduction of neutral peacekeeping forces, setting a precedent for future stages of disengagement.
Under this framework, the Alliance facilitates coordinated security handovers, phased redeployments, and transitional governance structures to prevent the emergence of power vacuums. By integrating Arab states, international peacekeeping forces, and Palestinian governing institutions into a unified architecture, the Alliance builds a measured path toward de-escalation. This process ensures that immediate security concerns are addressed while laying the long-term groundwork for sustainable Palestinian self-governance across all relevant territories.
A Compact of Free Association Between the United States and Palestine: A Time-Limited Framework for Sovereignty and Reconstruction
The reconstruction of Gaza will require substantial international investment, political buy-in, and sustained diplomatic engagement. Given the sheer scale of the humanitarian and infrastructural crisis, Gaza’s renewal demands not only immediate aid but a long-term, institutionalized framework capable of supporting comprehensive redevelopment efforts.
To balance international involvement with Palestinian sovereignty, I propose establishing a Compact of Free Association between the United States and the future Palestinian state as an incentive to join the Canaan Confederation. Such compacts—historically utilized by the United States with sovereign nations—allow for significant economic, educational, and diplomatic cooperation while preserving full national sovereignty and autonomy.
Why a Compact of Free Association?
Respect for Palestinian Sovereignty:
Unlike past controversial proposals that undermined Palestinian national autonomy, a Compact of Free Association would clearly delineate Palestinian sovereignty and self-determination. It would offer a legally defined partnership without imposing unilateral political solutions.
Structured American Support:
The United States, leveraging its unparalleled educational, technological, and diplomatic resources, would play a central role in rebuilding Gaza’s infrastructure and institutions. This structured commitment would provide stability and trust, encouraging international investment and collaboration.
The House of Wisdom Partnership:
American involvement in developing Gaza’s proposed House of Wisdom—positioning it as a global intellectual hub—would leverage established American educational networks and expertise, attracting scholars, entrepreneurs, and innovators from around the world. Qatar, already experienced in partnering with American educational institutions, could naturally facilitate this partnership.
Long-term Economic and Strategic Partnership:
This arrangement would provide a stable platform for Gaza’s economic revitalization, institutional development, and diplomatic engagement, aligning Palestinian interests directly with long-term American regional interests and creating mutual economic incentives for peace and prosperity.
Ultimately, a Compact of Free Association offers a pragmatic diplomatic compromise: it secures necessary international investment and cooperation, explicitly respects Palestinian autonomy, and provides the institutional and economic structures required for genuine, sustained redevelopment. By formalizing this partnership within the Canaan Confederation framework, Gaza can transform from a site of devastation into a lasting beacon of hope, resilience, and flourishing.
Confederation Support of the Hudna: Reducing Friction and Formalizing Mediation
Currently, ceasefires and truces involving Israel are mediated through ad-hoc negotiations, vulnerable to political shifts and lacking clear, consistent frameworks. The Canaan Peace Framework formalizes and strengthens this diplomatic process by providing a neutral, multilateral peace table dedicated to managing ceasefire agreements.
Purpose and Scope of Enforcement:
The Alliance/Confederation does not—and realistically cannot—guarantee absolute compliance or enforcement in the anarchic realm of international relations. Instead, its primary purpose is to:
Formalize Existing Mediation Efforts:
Create a standing diplomatic structure that centralizes existing bilateral mediation channels into a single cohesive forum, facilitating consistent communication and quicker diplomatic interventions when violations occur.Reduce Escalation and Friction:
Establish consistent, predictable procedures and clear expectations for addressing hudna violations. Rather than relying on fragmented diplomatic engagements, member states use the Confederation as an immediate platform to coordinate responses, clarify misunderstandings, and defuse tensions before they escalate.
Mechanisms for Enforcement and Accountability:
Immediate Diplomatic Intervention:
Confederation members convene rapidly following a reported violation, providing diplomatic clarity, mediation support, and rapid conflict-resolution channels.Multilateral Pressure Coordination:
Member states use diplomatic influence and leverage collectively—through joint statements, coordinated economic measures, and diplomatic engagement—to disincentivize and address violations swiftly, applying unified pressure rather than isolated bilateral responses.Clarity and Transparency:
The Confederation provides publicly accessible, transparent reporting on ceasefire adherence, clearly identifying violators and helping the international community respond with informed diplomatic pressure and accountability.
Limitations Acknowledged Explicitly:
This vision acknowledges the realistic limits of international enforcement: it does not assume military intervention or absolute guarantees of peace. Rather, it recognizes the Confederation’s role as an authoritative diplomatic and political hub designed explicitly to reduce the severity and frequency of ceasefire violations through structured communication, transparency, and multilateral pressure.
Strategic Ambiguity on Consequences:
While specific punitive or coercive responses are not predefined, maintaining strategic ambiguity allows flexibility for member states to determine appropriate responses based on evolving geopolitical circumstances and political willpower, maximizing diplomatic leverage without overcommitting to rigid enforcement obligations.
Borders, the Right to Return, and Other Final Status Issues: Deferred for Immediate Future
This plan avoids prescribing a rigid border resolution, recognizing that premature territorial determinations could undermine broader reconciliation efforts. Instead, final status issues, including the right of return, permanent borders, and the full sovereignty structure of a future Palestinian state, are deferred for now to allow for phased stabilization and trust-building.
Holy Land Lease Scheme
Per-Dunam Lease
As an interim bridging mechanism, the plan suggests a simple Holy Land Lease Scheme6. Under this model, Israel is permitted to control a negotiated baseline of land without incurring any lease cost. Any additional land acquired beyond is subject to a per-dunam lease scheme, defined by the function:
Where
R(L): cost of the marginal dunam L
L : Land controlled by Israel.
L (baseline) : Negotiated baseline land allocated to the State of Israel.
R0: Negotiated Base per-dunam lease rate for additional land.
α : Negotiated Incremental penalty rate for each dunam beyond.
Conceptual Optimization Problem:
The lease scheme frames Israel’s land-control decisions as an optimization problem:
Total lease cost:
The total lease cost for controlling land beyond the baseline is:
Security Dividend:
The security or "strategic value" of controlling land is represented by a benefit function B(L), conceptualized as a "security dividend" measured in monetary units. B(L) is assumed concave—initial increases in land control enhance security, but beyond an optimal point, additional land provides diminishing returns, eventually becoming negative due to overextension risks, internal instability, regional tensions, and increased Jewish insecurity due to the unresolved nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Net Benefit and Optimization Problem:
The objective is to maximize net benefit:\(U(L) = B(L) - C(L)\)Equivalently, one can minimize the cost-minus-benefit function
\(f(L) = C(L) - B(L) \)This formulation presents Israel's decision regarding territorial control as a convex optimization problem, conceptually guiding policy and negotiations.
Policy Implications:
The primary advantage of framing Israel's territorial decisions as an optimization problem is its conceptual clarity. Explicitly balancing a concave security dividend against escalating lease costs reveals strategic trade-offs typically obscured by ideological debates. By shifting negotiations toward concrete economic and strategic parameters, this approach incentivizes moderation and rational decision-making rather than maximalist territorial expansion.
Coordinating a Humanitarian Response to Displacement
The scale of displacement caused by the war will require a coordinated humanitarian response from Alliance member states and the international community. While reconstruction and repatriation will be prioritized, nations must also engage in structured discussions on how to address the immediate needs of displaced Palestinians in a way that ensures stability and prevents further regional destabilization. Failure to establish a structured response risks deepening instability and prolonging suffering. This effort will require diplomatic coordination, economic support, and phased solutions that balance humanitarian obligations with political realities, ensuring that displaced populations are not left in indefinite limbo.
Conditional Normalization through Confederation
For nations that do not currently maintain formal bilateral relations with Israel, accession to the Alliance/Confederation offers a novel diplomatic mechanism: conditional normalization. Rather than requiring full diplomatic recognition at the outset, joining the Alliance/Confederation constitutes a multilateral act of engagement—one that acknowledges Israel’s regional presence while tying normalization to tangible progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front.
This structure allows Arab and Muslim-majority nations to participate in shaping a regional order rooted in justice, dignity, and mutual respect, without compromising on their historical support for the Palestinian cause. It reframes normalization not as a reward for the status quo, but as a strategic lever for accountability and peace-building.
Participation in the Canaan Peace Framework therefore serves dual purposes: it opens avenues for cooperation and shared prosperity, while reinforcing a framework of conditionality—where Israel’s continued access to the benefits of normalization is predicated on forward movement toward a just resolution of the conflict, including adherence to international law, cessation of settlement expansion, and steps toward a long-term Palestinian governance arrangement.
This form of collective normalization, rooted in shared responsibility and mutual oversight, represents a third path—neither rejectionist nor prematurely conciliatory. It is a principled normalization, conditional and reversible, tied to the success of the Confederation as a vehicle for peace.
A Framework for the Post-October 7th Reality in the Middle East
Regardless of one's perspective on the final resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the tragic events beginning on October 7th underscore that the existing political frameworks have failed. A fundamentally new diplomatic and strategic infrastructure is urgently needed to stabilize, mediate, and ultimately transform the destructive dynamics currently dominating Israeli-Palestinian relations.
The Canaan Peace Framework serves precisely this purpose. It provides a neutral, structured platform to manage the complex realities of post-war reconstruction, governance reform, and phased demilitarization, acknowledging clearly that true healing will span generations. This Confederation will act as the necessary diplomatic substrate—durable, internationally supported, and strategically flexible—to sustain stabilization efforts beyond short-lived ceasefires and reactive diplomacy.
We harbor no illusions about immediate reconciliation. However, by establishing enduring institutional structures, the Confederation creates the conditions for genuine healing and cooperation when political will aligns. In doing so, it offers the international community a viable, long-term infrastructure to meaningfully support Israelis and Palestinians as they move beyond cycles of violence and toward lasting peace, dignity, and coexistence.
Concluding the Israel-Hamas War: Ending the 600-day nightmare
The Current Ceasefire and Hostage Deal Framework
Supplementing the current ceasefire framework with the endorsement of the vision provides much-needed hope to energize the process. While the existing focus on humanitarian crisis, healing, mourning, and reconstruction remains to address immediate concerns, this plan introduces a multi-generational vision for transforming Gaza from a militarized enclave under blockade and siege into a beacon of resilience and flourishing.
Alternatively, a new captive exchange framework can be initiated with a UN Security Council resolution that freezes the Israel-Hamas war. A high-level diplomatic summit would convene heads of state, regional stakeholders, and international mediators to develop and sign Articles of Confederation for the Alliance/Confederation.
Demilitarization of the Gaza Strip and Disengagement of Israeli Forces
Recognizing the Universal Right to Resist an Oppressive Force
No people subjected to domination and dispossession can be expected to relinquish the right to resist. The Palestinian nation has endured decades of structural violence and the systematic denial of its self-determination. In this context, resistance is not only expected—it is a natural response, as fundamental as Newton’s third law.
The Virtuous City Vision affirms this universal right while confronting the constraints of political reality. It recognizes that the reconstruction of Gaza—and the entry of international peacekeepers—will not occur without a credible pathway to demilitarization. This is the balance that must be struck: honoring the logic of organized resistance, while securing the future through a new architecture of stability.
Hamas and Other Palestinian Political Actors
A new political framework must acknowledge the existence of Hamas and other Palestinian militias as a political force while ensuring that the Gaza Strip has a pathway away from being a militarized enclave. No long-term international investment will occur if the world believes the strip will be devastated by more conflict. Therefore, an agreement for phased demilitarization and Israeli disengagement is a prerequisite for the Virtuous City Vision and will be a key-part of the initial Alliance Hudna.
Hamas has indicated a willingness to relinquish political control of Gaza—an intention that must be formalized clearly within any realistic reconstruction plan. Integrating Hamas into the Canaan Confederation could involve relocating its top military leaders into exile under diplomatic guarantees from Alliance member states, paired with a phased demilitarization of Gaza tied to political progress during the Hudna. This process would be supported by introducing Canaan Confederation peacekeepers into Gaza, accompanied by an Israeli commitment to disengage from Gaza and intervene militarily only as a last resort. Hamas would also revise its charter and political objectives, aligning with the Virtuous City Vision and Confederation objectives.
Optional PLO-Style Exile Framework
With over 50,000 dead and Israel openly discussing the transfer of Gaza’s population, the threat of mass expulsion due to renewed conflict is real. To prevent this, the Alliance can facilitate a structured transition—by recognizing that a PLO-style exile for Hamas’s hardline fighters could be part of the demand of demilitarization articulated by Israel and donor states that will help rebuild the Gaza Strip.
Hamas’s rank-and-file fighters would face a choice: embrace the Virtuous City Vision—integrating into a reconstructed Gaza under the Alliance’s framework—or accept exile to a Alliance member state. Those who choose to stay must commit to cooperative governance, economic rebuilding, and long-term disarmament, while those who refuse can leave through a structured, internationally mediated transition. This ensures Gaza’s long-term reconstruction, international investment, and security stabilization, while guaranteeing that most Palestinians remain in their homeland rather than face forced displacement.
The Gaza Strip’s Security and the Role of the Canaan Confederation Peacekeepers
The Arab League, led primarily by Egypt and Jordan, has proposed training a new Palestinian police force to replace the current Hamas-led security apparatus in Gaza. However, this initiative raises practical concerns. The existing Hamas security force comprises thousands of armed personnel who, if abruptly displaced without integration into new economic or governance structures, could create destabilizing consequences. Without viable pathways for reintegration into civilian life or peaceful governance, unemployed former officers might easily turn toward militancy or factional violence, undermining the stability of the new arrangement.
To address these risks, the Canaan Confederation would:
Complement the Egyptian-Jordanian Training Program by providing institutional and economic incentives for demobilized Hamas police officers to reintegrate into civilian roles, education initiatives, or reconstruction endeavors.
Deploy Peacekeeping Forces as an interim security solution, bridging the security gap between the phasing out of the Hamas-led forces and the full operationalization of the newly trained police force. This ensures stability during the critical transitional phase.
Support Reintegration Initiatives through programs linked to the establishment of the new House of Wisdom and the broader economic redevelopment of Gaza, offering former security personnel meaningful opportunities for professional development and economic inclusion, reducing incentives to return to militancy or criminality.
Implementing the Arab Plan To Reconstruct the Gaza Strip
The Virtuous City Vision complements both the Arab-backed Egyptian plan and the emerging Saudi-Emirati for Gaza by adding a strategic, cultural, and political dimension to its stabilization and reconstruction efforts.
The reconstruction of the Gaza Strip will require a monumental, coordinated effort to restore critical infrastructure, healthcare facilities, water systems, educational facilities, and transportation networks. To finance this massive undertaking, the Confederation will establish a dedicated endowment—the Canaan Confederation Waqf for Gaza Reconstruction managed transparently via the World Bank.
Iranian frozen assets can be redirected to seed the Canaan Confederation’s reconstruction endowment, providing a stable financial foundation for Gaza’s long-term renewal. This would form part of a broader U.S.–Iran normalization track that stabilizes the region and anchors Gaza’s rebuilding in durable diplomacy.
Principle Challenges to this Vision:
The Brutality of the Israel-Hamas War
One of the greatest obstacles to this vision is the sheer brutality of the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. The last 500 days have been the deadliest and most destructive in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, leaving a deep psychological and physical scar on both nations. The scale of death, displacement, and devastation has hardened attitudes on both sides, making the idea of reconciliation seem more distant than ever.
This war has been marked by accusations of genocide on both sides—the October 7th Hamas-led attack on Israel, which killed civilians in the deadliest assault on Jewish life since the Holocaust, and the subsequent war on Gaza, which has resulted in unprecedented destruction and civilian casualties. This war has deepened existential fears among Israelis and Palestinians, reinforcing a zero-sum mentality where both sides see survival as dependent on the destruction of the other. The brutality of the conflict has made rebuilding trust even more difficult, as both nations are locked in a cycle of trauma, vengeance, and mutual dehumanization.
Any vision for peace must acknowledge that reconciliation cannot happen overnight. The wounds of this war will take generations to heal. However, without a structured, long-term political framework like the Canaan Confederation, this conflict will continue to reset every few years, ensuring endless cycles of death and destruction.
Power Asymmetry as a Foundational Challenge
A central threat to this vision is the profound asymmetry of power between the Israeli and Palestinian nations. Israel possesses a sovereign state, a powerful military, economic and technological superiority, and broad international backing. Palestinians, by contrast, live under occupation or blockade, largely stateless, fragmented, and dispossessed. Any proposed framework for renewal must grapple with this imbalance—not just in force, but in narrative, infrastructure, and global legitimacy. Without intentional mechanisms to protect Palestinian sovereignty and agency, the risk is that this vision could be co-opted, diluted, or imposed in ways that replicate existing structures of domination. The challenge is not only to create shared space, but to ensure that space is just—and that justice is not confused with stability enforced by power.
The Moral Crisis of Israeli Ultranationalism
The greatest ideological obstacle to realizing the Virtuous City Vision is Israeli ultranationalism, which currently dominates state policy and public consciousness. While Israel was founded as a refuge for the Jewish people, its trajectory since the collapse of the peace process raises profound moral questions about its continued integrity. The path of permanent occupation, displacement, and dehumanization of Palestinians has betrayed the values that have sustained the Jewish people for millennia.
Israel was founded on a moral claim: that a people long persecuted, and nearly destroyed in the Holocaust, deserved a home of their own. But the occupation has annihilated the power of that claim. Millions live under military rule with no end in sight. The very nation that once stood as a beacon of ethical renewal now enforces a system that defiles its own founding ideals.
David Ben-Gurion understood that moral decline posed an existential threat to the Jewish state, just as the Hebrew Prophets warned. He recognized that Israel would ultimately be judged not by its military strength, technology, or economic success, but by its commitment to justice and righteousness. When Israel strays from these principles, its security does not endure, and its people become more vulnerable, not less.
Security built on the sands of injustice is no peace at all. It is a fragile illusion — a veneer of order maintained by force and denial. As the prophet Jeremiah lamented, “They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. ‘Peace, peace,’ they say, when there is no peace” (Jeremiah 6:14). And Ezekiel warned of those who “build a flimsy wall and cover it with whitewash,” deceiving the people into trusting a structure destined to collapse (Ezekiel 13:10).
These ancient indictments echo with piercing clarity today. The so-called Iron Wall of revisionist Zionism, constructed to project unshakable strength, deterrence, and permanence, was in truth a flimsy wall, daubed with whitewash7, propped up by militarism, dehumanization, and denial. It did not resolve the conflict; it entombed it. And on October 7th, 2023, that wall came crashing down, both in terms of security and in the greater moral and ideological collapse it revealed. The longer injustice masquerades as stability, the greater the reckoning when truth tears through its facade.
Today, as occupation, expansionism, and ultranationalism erode Israel’s ethical foundations, the security of the Jewish people continues to deteriorate. No military superiority or economic success can compensate for the loss of moral legitimacy, the alienation of allies, and the deepening of conflict. If Israel does not realign itself with its founding moral vision—to be a light unto nations8—it risks not only its soul but also its long-term stability, as isolation, unchecked aggression, and internal turmoil create conditions for future catastrophe.
Israeli Disillusionment with Peace
Another major challenge to this vision is Israeli disillusionment with the idea of peace, particularly in the wake of October 7th. For many Israelis, decades of peace efforts—Oslo, disengagement from Gaza, withdrawal from Lebanon, and portions of the West Bank, and normalization with Arab states—have not led to greater security but to continued violence. The attacks on October 7th, the deadliest day in Jewish history since the Holocaust, shattered the belief that territorial concessions or diplomatic agreements alone can bring lasting peace. Instead, many Israelis now see the conflict in existential terms, reinforcing the belief that any political compromise will only invite more violence.
This deepened mistrust and security-first mindset make any new framework difficult to implement. It is popular to believe that there is no real partner for peace, and that past efforts have only empowered their enemies. Overcoming this disillusionment requires acknowledging the failure of past peace initiatives to provide real security for Israelis and ensuring that any new vision prioritizes enforceable guarantees and long-term stability. Without addressing these fears, any attempt at reconciliation will be dismissed as naive at best and suicidal at worst.
A Direct Response to the Stated Grievances of the Israeli Nation
I went to extraordinary lengths to create a political framework that centers on the role of education as a direct response to the stated grievances of the Israeli nation. Israeli officials, scholars, and leaders have long argued that Palestinian society must be reformed before peace is possible—citing education as a core issue. Concerns over incitement in Palestinian textbooks, the glorification of militancy, and the lack of a strong civil society have been repeatedly raised as obstacles to a negotiated settlement. My proposal for a House of Wisdom and Peace is proposed to address this. If Israel is genuinely concerned about the future of Palestinian education and governance, then full support from the Israeli government and civil society should be provided for building this institution.
The Living Voice of Isaiah
The Book of Isaiah is disturbingly relevant to the modern state of Israel—less like an ancient Prophet condemning 8th century Israelites BCE and more like a direct response to the State of Israel’s present moral and security crisis. It speaks of a people once raised with purpose now alienated from their ethical foundation, of leaders corrupted by power, and of a society clinging to religious and national rituals while their “hands are full of blood.”
The prophet’s searing indictment of injustice, arrogance, and the exploitation of the vulnerable echoes today in the treatment of Palestinians, the erosion of democratic institutions, and the self-righteous nationalism that masks internal decay. But Isaiah does not merely critique—he warns that destruction will not come from enemies alone, but from within, through the betrayal of justice. His call to “cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression” reads less like scripture and more like an urgent plea to a modern nation teetering on the edge of moral collapse.
Isaiah’s words were forged in the crucible of ancient Judah, but they were not fulfilled there. Judah lacked the moral courage, the political integrity, and the historical conditions to respond to the prophet’s radical call for righteousness. His vision of redemption—a society where the poor are defended, violence is forsaken, and rulers judge with wisdom—was preserved not as a record of what was, but as a summons for what could be.
The modern state of Israel, unlike ancient Judah, possesses the institutions, the sovereignty, and the global standing to realize that vision. These prophetic words were not only for Isaiah’s generation; they were planted in time and preserved through exile and trauma so they could one day reach a nation capable of fulfilling them. That nation is Israel today. If it will listen, repent, and choose justice over domination, it may yet become the Zion Isaiah saw—not redeemed by power, but by righteousness.
Palestinian Steadfastness and Resistance to Compromise
The next most significant threat to this vision is Palestinian resistance to compromise. I do not seek to minimize the weight of the occupation or the denial of Palestinian self-determination—my work is a recognition of these realities. However, I have encountered the most unconstructive hostility from those aligned with the Palestinian cause. Maximalist rhetoric, inflexibility, and rejection of compromise alienate potential supporters, and at some point, ideology must give way to pragmatism if future catastrophes are to be avoided.
The 2000 Camp David Summit stands as the missed opportunity for the Palestinian leadership to advance the conflict toward resolution, and its rejection remains one of the most significant grievances of the Israeli nation regarding the failure of the peace process. While the proposal was imperfect—entrenching certain aspects of the occupation and falling short of full Palestinian sovereignty—it nonetheless represented a historic step forward, offering the potential for statehood, international legitimacy, and phased Israeli withdrawal. While Yasser Arafat’s cognitive decline must be considered when interpreting his team's actions during the negotiations, his failure to present a viable counteroffer left the peace process in a diplomatic void. Camp David’s failure marked a turning point where the path of progress stalled, deepening the entrenchment of occupation rather than challenging it through state-building and negotiations.
Bearing the Ongoing Nakba While Engaging With The Forces of Oppression
This vision can still be seen as a system of oppression, as it operates within existing power structures rather than dismantling them outright. However, it is necessary that this path exists as a viable alternative, as progress requires both external pressure and internal reform. In the realm of nations, where states must cooperate within the anarchy of modern geopolitics, having a framework that allows for engagement within the system is essential. Without such an option, all progress is left to external upheaval, making lasting stability impossible.
Working with those seen as oppressors carries a significant burden, one that many Palestinians understandably refuse to bear. Engaging with the very forces responsible for their displacement, dispossession, and continued occupation—those who enacted the Nakba and have since entrenched a system of control over Palestinian lives—can feel like a betrayal of the struggle for justice and self-determination. Resistance against oppression is not only legitimate but a fundamental right, and history has shown that defiance is often the only way to assert national and personal dignity. However, complete refusal to engage can also lead to stagnation, prolonging suffering without creating tangible pathways for change. Pragmatism—though painful—is sometimes necessary to carve out space for progress, whether through diplomacy, negotiation, or strategic compromise. This does not mean accepting subjugation or abandoning the right to resist, but recognizing that engaging with power, even in limited ways, can sometimes yield concrete gains that pure defiance cannot. The challenge for Palestinians is finding ways to navigate this reality without legitimizing injustice or surrendering the core of their struggle, even as they continue to live with the enduring trauma of the Nakba.
Palestinian Disillusionment to Western Political Frameworks
Another challenge to this vision is Palestinian disillusionment with the international political systems that have repeatedly failed them. Since the Mandate of Palestine, Western-led diplomatic efforts have promised pathways to sovereignty and stability but have instead resulted in occupation, fragmentation, and unfulfilled commitments. Palestinians have watched as international mediation has either reinforced the status quo or failed to deliver tangible progress, leading to deep-seated distrust of external interventions.
This disillusionment presents a serious obstacle to any new framework—Palestinians have little reason to believe that another international initiative will produce different results. Overcoming this challenge requires acknowledging the failures of past political processes and ensuring that this vision is not another imposed settlement but a structure that empowers Palestinians to shape their own future. Without addressing this skepticism, any attempt at long-term reconciliation will struggle to gain legitimacy among those who have spent generations watching peace processes collapse.
The Burden of Formalizing New Religious Traditions
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict reflects deeper Jewish-Muslim tensions, rooted in centuries of history and tied to the very founding of Islam. While security and political agreements are necessary, true reconciliation requires a deeper intellectual and cultural shift.
The greatest ask from the Israeli nation is not territorial concessions or political recognition—it is a shift in the Palestinian national consciousness. This transformation must be internal, not imposed, and requires a flexible and adaptive use of Islamic tradition to acknowledge the shared historical and intellectual heritage between Judaism and Islam.
This burden, however, falls disproportionately on the Palestinian nation. While both Israelis and Palestinians must contribute to this transformation, it is Palestinians who will need to spearhead this cultural shift within the broader Islamic world. Without such a change in perception, no political agreement can hold, and the cycle of conflict will continue. The risk is that this effort may be seen as an external imposition, yet without it, lasting peace remains unattainable.
While some may view the formalization of the Judeo-Islamic and Abrahamic traditions as an unacceptable bid‘ah (religious innovation), these frameworks already exist implicitly within the Islamic tradition, as Islam grants limited recognition to the People of the Book. This is not aimed at subverting Palestinian identity or Islamic principles—it is an intellectual and theological foundation for coexistence that aligns with Islamic tradition.
These traditions are meant to form an educational framework for reconciliation, providing a structured path toward mutual understanding. Without such an intellectual foundation, any peace agreement will remain fragile, reliant on temporary political calculations rather than a true transformation in relations.
A critical aspect of this long-term reconciliation may require Palestinian acceptance of a pathway the implementation of Isaiah 56:7—affirming the Temple Mount as a house of prayer for all nations. This would acknowledge the shared Abrahamic heritage of the land while creating a framework for interfaith stewardship that moves beyond exclusivist claims to sacred space.
The Critical Role of International Engagement
Finally, International engagement will be critical. Apathy by other nations will doom this vision, and the cycle of violence will continue unabated. We recognize that all nations will need to prioritize our shared humanity in order for this grand scheme to work.
The United States, in particular, will need to play a foundational role in guaranteeing the stability and continuity of the Canaan Confederation across administrations. While different U.S. administrations will inevitably have varying priorities within the framework, this is by design—it allows the vision to evolve with global dynamics while ensuring that forward progress on the conflict remains a bipartisan imperative.
Europe will be essential in filling the inevitable gaps that arise when American priorities shift or domestic politics delay U.S. engagement. European states, bound by proximity, economic ties, and historical responsibility, must act as the stabilizing ballast that sustains reconstruction and mediation during periods of American retrenchment. In doing so, they demonstrate that Europe’s role in the Middle East is not as a secondary actor, but as a permanent guarantor of stability, investment, and multilateral diplomacy.
The Arab world must also maintain its solidarity and advocacy for the rights and needs of the Palestinians on the international stage. This requires more than rhetoric; it demands sustained political capital, material investment, and a united commitment to ensuring that Palestinian sovereignty, dignity, and security remain non-negotiable pillars in any future settlement.
The Canaan Confederation is structured to support—not bypass—the American-led international order. In a time of increasing multipolarity and waning confidence in U.S. global leadership, this framework offers a path to reestablish American credibility as a principled and effective peacemaker. It serves as a mechanism to maintain Pax Americana by demonstrating that the United States can still foster bold, multilateral solutions rooted in justice, diplomacy, and human dignity.
Conclusion: A Grandiose But Pragmatic and Moral Vision for the Future of the Gaza Strip and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
There currently lacks a grandiose, unifying vision for a post-war and rebuilt Gaza Strip articulated by any actors involved in the Israel-Hamas War and the greater Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. For the sanctity of human life, we must use the aftermath of the Israel-Hamas War as an opportunity to change the trajectory of the internecine conflict that characterizes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the greater Middle East while still respecting the resilience, dignity, and self-determination of the Israeli and Palestinian nations.
The Virtuous City Vision envisions a future where the devastation of war is replaced by a flourishing society rooted in justice, education, and collective well-being. The Virtuous City Vision bridges the geopolitical and cultural fault line between the Western and Islamic worlds by drawing on the shared intellectual heritage of both civilizations, demonstrating that peace, governance, and human flourishing are not bound by ideology but by universal principles of justice, knowledge, and coexistence.
The "Virtuous City" is not a quick fix or a utopian fantasy. It is a long-term vision, a multi-generational project that will require sustained commitment and effort, ultimately resting on the shoulders of the Palestinian and Israeli people and their future generations of leaders. Recognizing this reality allows for a pragmatic approach that bridges humanitarian necessity with economic and political sustainability, making Gaza’s rebuilding not just an act of charity but an opportunity for finally resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Appendix A: Sample Roadmap From Alliance to Confederation
Phase 1: Alliance for the Stabilization of Canaan (Years 1–10)
The Alliance is the interim implementation, framed as a pragmatic partnership to overcome sovereignty concerns while delivering voluntary commitments through negotiated protocols. It ensures deep stakeholder involvement (“everyone in everyone’s shit”), protects Arab investments, and ties Israel’s normalization to Palestinian statehood progress.
Structure
Members: Israel, PA, Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, U.S., EU, UN, neutral mediators, religious leaders (Jewish, Muslim, Christian).
Central Coordinating Secretariat: Neutral, administrative body hosted by a neutral party (e.g., Jordan, UN, Switzerland). It:
Coordinates five working groups: Security, State-Building (with Governance and Reconstruction Sub-Group), Diplomatic, Economic, Religious and Educational Reconciliation.
Manages Waqf for Gaza Reconstruction.
Publishes transparent progress reports.
Facilitates dispute resolution with mediators.
Working Groups:
Security Group: Negotiates ceasefire protocols prohibiting unilateral Israeli bombing (e.g., of Egypt-trained PA forces), enforced by peacekeepers (e.g., Jordan, UN) monitoring Gaza’s borders. Egypt leads intelligence-sharing to address threats (e.g., Hamas rockets).
State-Building Group (Governance Sub-Group): Coordinates PA-led Gaza governance, with Egypt training 5,000 police to replace Hamas, UAE/Saudi Arabia funding reconstruction (e.g., ports, hospitals), and Israel agreeing to protocols.
Diplomatic Group: Negotiates borders, Jerusalem, refugees, with interim statehood milestones (e.g., PA governance in Gaza by Year 5).
Economic Group: Promotes trade (e.g., Gaza economic zone linked to UAE), tying Israel’s integration to statehood progress.
Religious Reconciliation Group: Negotiates holy site access (e.g., Al-Aqsa) and funds interfaith initiatives (e.g., schools), with Jordan and Saudi Arabia lending legitimacy.
Binding Commitments
Ceasefire Protocol: Israel commits to no bombing without Security Group consultation, with peacekeepers verifying threats. Violations trigger diplomatic pressure, trade or security cooperation disruption .
Gaza Governance: PA-led, with Arab nations support conditional on Israel’s compliance with the Alliance Framework, meeting Arab demands for investment security.
Statehood Pathway: Interim milestones (e.g., Gaza governance by Year 5, statehood framework by Year 10) meet Arab normalization conditions.
Conditional Normalization: Arab states (e.g., Saudi Arabia) engage in phased normalization (e.g., trade, diplomacy) tied to statehood progress, incentivizing Israel.
Gaza Reconstruction
The Governance Sub-Group coordinates PA-led administration, with Arab led police training and funding, and Israel agreeing to no bombing if peacekeepers verify no threats.
A Compact of Free Association between the U.S. and Palestine supports Gaza’s reconstruction, leveraging U.S. resources (e.g., educational networks for a House of Wisdom hub) while respecting Palestinian sovereignty.
Phase 2: Option for Confederation for Canaan (Years 11–20)
If trust is established (e.g., Gaza stability, ceasefire adherence, statehood progress), and interest maintained, members may transition to a Confederation for Canaan as a semi-permanent peace and negotiation table with a generational mandate, avoiding a central enforcing council.
Structure
Permanent Negotiation Table: Replaces the Secretariat, formalizing coordination through consensus-driven agreements.
Functions: Continues the five working groups, overseeing Gaza governance, security protocols, statehood negotiations, economic integration, and religious reconciliation.
Composition: Member representatives, with neutral mediators, operating on consensus or supermajority to preserve flexibility.
Binding Commitments:
Formalized protocols prevent Israeli bombing, with stronger consequences (e.g., economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation).
Arab investments remain protected.
Statehood milestones (e.g., Palestinian state framework by Year 15) ensure Saudi Arabia’s continued normalization conditions.
Gaza Governance: Solidifies PA-led administration, with Arab support continuing and Hamas marginalized or formally integrated within the Alliance/Confederation framework.
Normalization: Arab states continue conditional normalization with Israel as statehood advances, completing regional integration.
Phase 3: Mature Confederation (Years 21–30)
The Confederation matures into a permanent regional framework, institutionalizing peace and integration.
Finalize Palestinian statehood with UN recognition.
Phase out peacekeepers as PA forces take over.
Conclude a peace treaty and integrate economies (e.g., regional trade bloc).
Institutionalize religious reconciliation via permanent interfaith councils.
Fārābī. (1998). Mabādiʾ Ārāʾ Ahl Al-Madīnat Al-Fāḍilah. Kazi Publications.
Lewis, B. (1984). The Jews of Islam. Princeton University Press.
Nasr, S. H., & Leaman, O. (Eds.). (2001). History of Islamic philosophy. Routledge.
Teveth, S. (1985). Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs: From Peace to War. Oxford University Press.
Agranat-Tamir, Lily et al. (n.d.). The Genomic History of the Bronze Age Southern Levant. Cell, 181(5), 1146-1157.e11. https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2930487-6
This is also a Pigouvian tax on the occupation of Palestinian land.