A Financing Architecture for Gaza's Reconstruction
Dozens of plans exist for rebuilding Gaza; none answers who will pay, who will decide, and who will guarantee that what is financed is not destroyed again. Omar Shaban proposes a single national and international financing architecture: one Palestinian authority, a multilateral fund, independent oversight, war-risk guarantees and a political and security agreement.
Omar Shaban: Gaza needs a financing architecture, not another plan — one Palestinian authority, a multilateral fund, oversight and war-risk guarantees.
A May 2026 review by the Portland Trust counted 34 plans for Gaza's future. The final EU–UN–World Bank assessment (April 2026) puts physical damage at $35.2 billion and economic and social losses at $22.7 billion. A pledge is a political decision; a transfer is a financial, administrative and security one. Investors cannot price assets that may be destroyed in the next war; the Gulf faces its own security needs and competing reconstructions; and financing conditions risk becoming leverage over Palestinian governance — or turning withheld Palestinian revenues into conditional grants.
The problem is not that the world lacks the money but that it lacks the political and security guarantee that would make spending in Gaza “an investment in the future rather than a down payment on the next war.” Needs are $71.4 billion over ten years; of the $17 billion pledged in February 2026, only about one percent had been transferred three months later.
Recommendations
Build a single national and international financing architecture rather than another reconstruction plan.
Establish a unified Palestinian authority responsible for negotiations and for setting priorities.
Create a multilateral international fund combining grants, concessional loans and private investment.
Set up an independent transparency and oversight mechanism, with independent auditing, competitive procurement, anti-corruption measures and published financial data.
Put in place an international war-risk guarantee system: political-risk guarantees, war-risk insurance, loss-sharing mechanisms, a pre-funded compensation facility and multilateral guarantees for strategic projects.
Conclude a political and security agreement guaranteeing access, the entry of materials and equipment, and protection of projects from repeated destruction.
Keep withheld Palestinian clearance revenues under Palestinian ownership, and do not tie decision-making seats to the size of financial contributions.
Expected outcomes
A reconstruction that can be protected and sustained, so that spending in Gaza becomes “an investment in the future rather than a down payment on the next war.”
Financing Gaza becoming a rational decision for donors and investors once the equation governing its risks changes.
Center for Conflict and Humanitarian Studies (CHS) webinar “Unmet Needs: Gaza's Humanitarian Crisis and the International Response Gap” — online, Doha (11 May 2026) — 2026