Press Releases
(Bethlehem, 11 August 2026)
The Israeli regime has rejected the 15-point Board of Peace (BoP) roadmap, with Netanyahu declaring that Israeli forces will not withdraw until the resistance is “truly disarmed.” This rejection concerns the roadmap’s terms and sequencing, not its clear colonial architecture, which remains aligned with Israeli interests in disarmament, containment of Palestinian political agency and control over withdrawal. A failure rooted in Israeli crimes and the colonial structure of control reproduced by the Board of Peace itself. Helmed by Nikolai Mladenov, it serves as the proposed mechanism for implementing President Trump’s illegal “Comprehensive Peace Plan” the Twenty Point Plan – advancing the external administration of Gaza under conditions created by genocide. Framed through the paternalistic language of reconstruction, stability and governance, it seeks to reorganize Palestinian political life while making survival and humanitarian relief contingent upon the dismantling of Palestinian resistance, rather than dismantling the structures that produced genocide. The BoP administers the Israeli colonial aims of: displacement, confinement, territorial fragmentation and subjugation, foreclosing Palestinian liberation and self-determination through Palestinian disarmament, externally administered governance and conditional reconstruction.
States shield their complicity in enabling Israeli genocide, by administering its consequences. The so-called October 2025 ceasefire has not ended the destruction in Gaza: reconstruction has not begun, nearly the entire population remains displaced, and the conditions necessary for collective survival continue to be systematically dismantled. More than 1,250 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire’s announcement, including during negotiations surrounding the BoP roadmap, while more than 59 percent of Gaza’s population continues to face crisis-level or worse food insecurity amid the Israeli regime’s continued obstruction of humanitarian assistance. Against this continuing killing, the BoP’s declaration that “UNRWA has no new place in the new Gaza” signals an attempt to supplant the UN system as well as aid, infrastructure, and services required for Palestinian survival, while the “yellow line” weaponizes the ceasefire itself to consolidate Israeli control over 70 percent of the Gaza Strip. The proposed “humanitarian shelter centres” extend this logic from administering aid to administering Palestinians themselves: displaced survivors would be transferred into fenced compounds under “foreign stabilization forces’ of complicit states; essentially concentration camps.
Alongside enabling Israeli impunity and shielding their complicity, states present the BoP as a pathway to ending the genocide, with the disarmament of Palestinian resistance as the principal condition for its purported end. The BoP proposes the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) as the mechanism through which reconstruction, governance and political transition would proceed, treating the centralization and decommissioning of Palestinian weapons as the foundation of that process. While Palestinian resistance factions agreed in July 2026 only to inventory and storage heavy weapons, military production sites, weapons depots and tunnels under the NCAG, this commitment was expressly conditioned upon Israeli compliance with the October 2025 ceasefire – obligations that continue to be violated. Nevertheless, the BoP's May 2026 report to the Security Council described disarmament as "the single factor that unlocks every other element of the plan."
Both the BoP and the roadmap plans rest upon a racialized and Zionist construction of "terror" that detaches Palestinian resistance from the colonial conditions that produced it: apartheid, forced displacement and the denial of Palestinian self-determination. Disarmament is pursued without dismantling the structures that have subjected Palestinians to genocide, displacement and dispossession. Self-determination remains inseparable from the right of a people living under colonial domination to resist it; security cannot be achieved by suppressing resistance while preserving the conditions that make it necessary.
The asymmetry of this proposed framework reflects the broader international failure to confront colonial domination. Mladenov's assertion that “[Israeli] withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning" creates the appearance of reciprocal obligations while concealing a profound imbalance. The BoP only a week later made this explicit, stating that Israeli withdrawal beyond the Yellow Line would occur only after the “complete decommissioning” of Palestinian resistance. Israeli rejection therefore does not represent a rejection of the roadmap’s colonial premises, but a demand for greater control over their implementation. A true ceasefire, meaningful reconstruction and Israeli withdrawal remain contingent upon the very regime responsible for the commission of genocide and sustaining the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people since 1948.
The politics of recognition follows the same logic. The convergence between Paragraph 11 of the New York Declaration on Palestinian ‘statehood’, and Point 6 of the BoP roadmap ("One Authority, One Law, One Weapon") are a shared project of reorganizing Palestinian ‘self-determination’ through externally sanctioned institutions. The proposed NCAG and the consolidation of authority under the Palestinian Authority seek to centralize governance within structures acceptable to international actors while marginalizing political forces rooted in resistance. The Trump administration's outright denial of Palestinian statehood and European recognition politics are therefore not opposing visions but complementary modalities of the same project: one refuses Palestinian sovereignty outright, while the other conditions its symbolic recognition upon political compliance, disarmament and externally imposed limits. Their convergence unfolds alongside escalating colonizer attacks, killings, forced displacement, and land theft across the West Bank, demonstrating that recognition, like reconstruction, is a tool used to maintain and entrench colonial domination.
The failure to prevent genocide has become the point of departure for colonial governance. Rather than dismantling the colonial structures that enable genocide, the BoP and complicit states seek to continue it through colonial reconstruction, humanitarian management, disarmament and conditional recognition – rather than impose comprehensive sanctions. Without decolonization, reconstruction becomes the reconstruction of the system that produced the ongoing Nakba and genocide. Justice cannot be pursued by suppressing resistance while preserving the colonial conditions that make resistance in pursuit of Palestinian self-determination both lawful and necessary.