Daily Briefing Sept. 18: Day 713 – Tony Blair plans for postwar Gaza, without displacing residents

Welcome to The Times of Israel’s Daily Briefing, your 20-minute audio update on what’s happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world.

US bureau chief Jacob Magid joins host Jessica Steinberg for today’s episode.

Magid discusses the draft of a proposal developed by former UK prime minister Tony Blair for a transitional body for postwar Gaza. He notes that Israel is still engaging with this topic and that the proposal does not call for the displacement of Gazans.

As security talks in the UK between Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and Israel continue, Magid says an announcement could come within days, possibly coinciding with al-Sharaa’s appearance at the United Nations General Assembly.

The long-running Palestinian Authority “pay-to-slay” program that critics claimed incentivized terror attacks against Israelis is over, according to Magid, with a new program instituted to hand out benefits to people based on economic need. There haven’t been any payments yet as the PA is out of cash and relies on revenues that Israel collects on its behalf, which Israel has been withholding over various issues.

After US Senator Bernie Sanders used the term genocide to refer to the ongoing war in Gaza, Magid notes that Sanders has been one of the most vocal critics of Israel.

Check out The Times of Israel’s ongoing liveblog for more updates.

For further reading:

Revealed: Tony Blair’s US-backed proposal for ending the Gaza war and replacing Hamas

PA document shows ‘pay-to-slay’ has been scrapped, new system in place

Hostage families camp outside PM’s home amid rumored start to Gaza City ground op

Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by Podwaves.

The following is a full transcript of today’s episode:

Jessica Steinberg: Hi, welcome to the Times of Israel’s Daily Briefing. It is Thursday, September 18, and I’m Jessica Steinberg.

I’m speaking today with US Bureau Chief Jacob Magid.

Hi, Jacob. How are you doing?

Jacob Magid: Hey, Jessica. Good to be with you again.

Jessica Steinberg: Good to have you here. It is day 713 of the war. As the IDF continues its ground offensive in Gaza City and as hostage family members continue sleeping in an encampment outside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Jerusalem residence, Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer was set to meet US [Special] Envoy [for the Middle East] Steve Witkoff in London Wednesday night in another effort, a last-ditch effort, to revive ceasefire negotiations and hostage talks.

Meanwhile, we have in our headlines that Israel and Syria are in talks with the help of US mediation in London in order to reach security understandings.

And also, by chance, in London, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer plans to formally recognize a Palestinian state after US President Donald Trump completes his state visit to the UK, his upcoming state visit.

We’ll discuss some of that, as well as Jacob’s exclusive about former UK prime minister Tony Blair’s US-backed proposal for ending the war in Gaza and replacing Hamas. Stay with us.

Okay, so Jacob, as we speak, you are completing your story about this. You obtained documents about this US-backed proposal, Blair’s US-backed proposal for ending the war in Gaza and replacing Hamas, which you and I discussed a few weeks ago when there was the sit-down in the White House. This looks a lot more definitive, much more advanced than what we had discussed then. Tell us how this came about. Clearly, if it’s getting out there, then there’s something much more advanced about the whole plan. So what can you tell us?

Jacob Magid: I don’t know if those behind the plan necessarily wanted it leaked, but that’s where we are at the moment. I was able to gain a few more details about how this proposal came about.

As you mentioned, the White House on August 27, when Tony Blair and Jared Kushner [who served as a senior advisor during Trump’s first administration] were meeting with President Trump about this post-war plan for Gaza, the White House subsequently downplayed the policy, called it a simple policy discussion, and not too much was heard about what had unfolded or what was the result of the meeting.

But what I’ve been able to learn in parallel with obtaining this document of what the Blair plan actually is, is that it was a pretty significant decision by President Trump at the time to basically give Blair his blessing to try to rally support in the region via Israel, the PA, others, Saudi Arabia, for this plan. And that’s what he’s been trying to do since.

The people behind the plan would say there has been some success, that Blair has met with Abu Mazen, the Palestinian Authority president, who is engaging constructively, I was told, that the Israelis as well, Dermer and Netanyahu, are also engaging constructively, and that this is the only plan that actually has engagement from various players that are going to be needed in order to stand up this new Gaza International Transitional Authority, the GITA, it’s being called in the plan.

One of the sources I spoke with did admit, though, was that what derailed the effort in recent days was the strike in Doha [Qatar] that Israel tried to target Hamas leaders. Because, I guess, Blair was in the process of trying to convince Qatar and Egyptian mediators to coax Hamas to basically get behind or not stand in the way of this deal. Blair is still going to continue trying to push forward, but that there was a recognition that things were derailed a bit. But that’s where things stand right now.

Jessica Steinberg: Right. Of course, I’m sort of going across the ocean. But then you also have our headline about President Trump expressing his, shall we say, frustration with Prime Minister Netanyahu about the Doha strike, about the tension of the last days. It seemed to refer to the Doha strike as well, that frustration.

Jacob Magid: Yeah, I think Trump’s frustration may be also related to this plan that he’s hoping to get up on the ground.As much as there’s been private engagement, the key is to be able to get basically the leaders of the region to sign on to a set of principles. That’s what Blair has been trying to do over these past few days in order to basically announce that the US is formally endorsing this plan and that now we’ll be able to hold negotiations on the very more fine details. What’s interesting, I can just a few little things about the plan that I encourage our readers to take a look in the story, but is the role that the PA, for example, is envisioned. I think as far as Ramallah is concerned, it doesn’t go far enough that it talks about basically this Gaza International Transitional Authority basically coordinating with the PA, but not really allowing the PA to oversee the effort.

And on the other hand, it’s probably too much for Israel because it still talks about eventually transitioning to handing it off to the PA, to the PA being the one to run Gaza and the Gaza Strip and the West Bank unified under one PA rule. That’s not something that Netanyahu has ever been willing to accept. So I guess what the plan is trying to do is it’s not going to make everyone happy, but maybe meets the sides a little bit halfway.

And with enough US support, which is apparently there to start with, that there could be room to advance it. And I think the key is to be able to try to get Saudi Arabia on board. And that’s what Tony Blair has been working on doing.

Just a small anecdote from that meeting on August 27, what Trump basically told Tony Blair when he was giving him his blessing was, okay, now go get Johnny on board. Johnny is the nickname that Trump uses to refer to MBS [Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman]. And that’s how the US views, I think, the importance of getting Saudi Arabia on border in support of this plan, because without it, it’s very unlikely to be able to get the other players in the region on board. Or even because this plan envisions a UN Security Council resolution that basically creates this transitional authority, that in order to get it through the Security Council, you need Russia and China, for example, not to veto. And the feeling in amongst Blair’s circle and in the US is that if Saudi Arabia is on board, maybe we think that Russia and China will be willing to step aside and allow this to move forward.

Jessica Steinberg: And of course, it’s all against the background of the upcoming, you know, statements that are going to be made in the UN about a Palestinian state. So it’s perfect storm might not be the right idiom to use right here, but it does feel like it’s all coming together at one particular moment.

I wanted to ask you something else about this plan, having read your piece, that it’s not a displacement plan, not a displacement of Gazans. And that, of course, also runs counter to another statement that was made on Wednesday by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who referred again to displacement and about Gaza as a potential, you know, real estate bonanza. So that’s very interesting to sort of see all those things coming together. Can you talk about that?

Jacob Magid: Yeah, thanks for highlighting that. I’ve been working on this story for quite a few hours now, and I forgot that really integral piece, which is yes, because I think what Blair has been associated with in recent weeks has been a couple of plans that talk about basically either encouraging the migration of Gazans. That’s the Israeli, I think, euphemism that’s being used or the concept of building a Gaza Riviera. There were a couple of reports about that. I think one in The Washington Post, one in Financial Times that were tying Blair, tying GHF, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, tying Ron Dermer all to those kinds of initiatives.

But if you look at this plan, this 21-page document that I obtained, there’s no mention of that at all. And actually what the plan talks about is even creating a basically an authority, creating what it calls to be a property rights preservation unit, which will be aimed at ensuring that any voluntary departure of Gazans does not compromise their rights to return to the enclave or retain property ownership.

So this concept that Smotrich is talking about to basically a real estate bonanza that the US and Israel are working right now to divvy up the land in Gaza for sale to Israelis and others, or [National Security Minister Itamar] Ben-Gvir talking about that he wants to build a neighborhood for police officers in Gaza, in the Gaza Strip. That doesn’t fly with this. And I spoke with one US official for this story who said that it seems like Smotrich did not get the memo that Trump has moved away from these kinds of ideas and is backing right now the Blair plan, which is adamantly against the concept of forced migration or even making, I think, or any sort of proposal that Israel has been talking about more recently.

One source involved in the effort did note that, of course, we’re not trying to turn Gaza into a prison and that there for anyone who wants to leave will be able to do so. But we’re not trying to create mechanisms that encourage people to leave.

Jessica Steinberg: And again, Jacob, just to emphasize something I’m pretty sure you said a few minutes ago, and that is that Netanyahu is very much aware of this, of these talks, of this conversation, is on board for the fact that the conversations are happening and the proposals happening.

Jacob Magid: Yeah, that’s the tricky, that’s the noteworthy part that the source involved in the effort stressed that they are engaging with the Israelis. I spoke with another, an Arab diplomat who said, yeah, they’re speaking with Netanyahu and Dermer specifically has been tasked to engage with Tony Blair. However, what the Arab diplomat also noted is Netanyahu has a history with dispatching Dermer to have these very sensitive conversations and then ultimately deciding to derail the effort in order to keep his coalition intact when the time is right. That’s how the Arab diplomat put it. I think Blair’s circle, I think, has a more optimistic or hopeful look of how this will pan out. But for the moment, yes, Israel is still engaging with this effort.

Jessica Steinberg: Okay, thanks so much for that. We’re going to take a break. When we’re back, we’ll talk about a number of topics that we haven’t gotten to yet. So stay with us.

Okay, so let’s deal with the headline that’s at the top of our pages right now. Syria and Israel, President Ahmed al-Sharaa said it could be a security pact with Israel could be coming in literally in the coming days. There’s a great quote in the story that we have on our site where he says, you know, quote, “It’s a difficult case — you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” as he said, smiling to reporters. So what can you tell us about that? Of course, it is juxtaposed with what’s going on in Gaza. So positive news is always helpful.

Jacob Magid: Yeah, I think it was pretty noteworthy that he’s giving a timeline and not just saying that we’re making progress, but saying that we could be within days of an announcement. I think it coincides with the UN General Assembly, where Sharaa will be in town. And I believe he’s also going to be meeting with US officials. I think his foreign minister is supposed to be in Washington. There could be meetings also with Jewish community leaders that are in the cards as well. A lot of interesting things that will likely be happening on the sidelines.

But one of them, more importantly, is these negotiations between Israel and Syria that the US has been helping broker. And I think trying to push to be able to have an announcement that Trump can talk about in his speech at the UN General Assembly, what Shara says is it will be similar to the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria. So it will require Israel likely to withdraw some of its troops or agree to a demilitarized zone between the two countries. I would still urge a little bit of caution in assuming that we’re done already or that this is going to be a normalization deal.

I think that Israel continues to strike Syria pretty regularly, and that has created a lot of, I think, animosity between the sides that is still going to be difficult to overcome very quickly. But the fact that Sharaa is saying publicly that we could be days away from an announcement is something that shouldn’t be ignored.

Jessica Steinberg: Let’s turn to another topic that you’ve been covering very, very steadily for really several years at this point. The pay to slay Palestinian Authority is saying that it has completed the establishment of a new welfare program that would phase out the previous system in which it seemed to be incentivizing terror attacks against Israelis. This is, again, within the Palestinian Authority. So tell us where we’re at with this. From what I could tell, we’re not really at the point of Ramallah receiving the payments, the welfare payments, that has to do partially with Israel and the PA. But take us through it. So tell us where we’re at right now.

Jacob Magid: Sure. So if you take a step back in February, President Abbas, after many years of pressure to reform this pay to slay program, which basically conditions payments to the families of security prisoners on the length of their sentence. So effectively, what Israel says is incentivizing attacks on Israelis. Those payments are coupled with alspayments to the families of slain attackers. And so this is something that Israel has been years for years criticizing and the US as well. And during the Biden administration, there have been a lot of effort to try to get the PA to reform this process.

The PA ultimately waited, I think, until the Trump administration in order to give a gesture of goodwill to try to open a new page of relations with with Trump after the first term, where they kind of soured very, very quickly after, I think, Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in 2017. And there were no ties after that. So now we’re in a new page.The PA announces this, and you see an initial, very quick response from the State Department at the time, calling it a win for Trump. But almost immediately afterwards, the rhetoric changed to we want to see it, to believe it.

And so what the PA has been asked to do in the months that followed since February is prove that they’ve actually stopped this program. And what I managed to get a hold of was this document that they’ve been starting to pass around to interlocutors in earlier this month that basically suggests that they have, in fact, ended the previous program and alsoinstituted a new program in order to pay people strictly based off of economic need. And what the paper that I obtained highlights is the fact that there were three thousand people who were receiving stipends before based on their prison length, and they have now been deemed ineligible for this welfare program.

And on the other hand, there are two thousand households who have now been deemed to be, I guess, poor enough, you could say, to qualify for this program for the first time. There’s also talk in the document about the formation of a technical board that’s going to be adjudicating this process, that the various other steps are actually in place. The one thing that actually hasn’t happened, though, yet is the first round of payments under this new system. And that’s because, as you mentioned, the PA is basically out of cash. They rely heavily on these monthly transfers of clearance revenues that Israel collects on its behalf.

These make up about 65 to 75 percent of the PA’s budget for the year. Since the spring, Israel has been withholding those monthly transfers over various issues, be it its opposition to the PA pushing or encouraging efforts against Israel at the ICC [International Criminal Court]. There were sanctions that the UK announced against Smotrich and Ben-Gvir that also were cited as reasons for why Israel wasn’t transferring these funds. But these are Palestinian funds that they simply have not been getting for months, and therefore they have not been able to pay their public employees, let alone welfare recipients, for quite a long time.

Actually, this week they just announced that they were able to pay the PA’s public sector employees for the month of June. So we’re now in September. For the month of June, they got their payments in recent days. And the expectation is that now, once the PA gets a little bit more money, they’ll be able to also pay recipients of the welfare program to really seethat this new system is in place. But I think this document has convinced certain interlocutors, mainly in the EU, to believe that the PA has been implementing this reform. But of course, there are those who are very skeptical.

The last thing I’ll just note about this story is that what’s an interesting tidbit to this is that how the US has been the one for years that had been asking the PA to carry out this reform. And after it was conducted, the PA basically sent a letter to the State Department inviting them, starting June 1, to come and certify that this new reform is in place. But that letter has basically gone unanswered, and the US has not sent anyone to certify the reform. But the PA feels it’s important in order for it to get legitimacy internationally to have someone do the certification. So they’ve worked to try to get an auditing firm, like an international consulting firm, that they’re paying out of pocket in order to do this, which they don’t really have a lot of money to do, in order to get this audit completed. And it’s expected to be done in the next two or three months. And I think the PA hopes that that will be enough to get the US on board. But it also risks the possibility that the US will say, well, we don’t trust this auditing firm and we want to do our own conclusion, which we haven’t been willing to send a delegation to do.

Jessica Steinberg: Right. Okay, so we’ll have to sort of see how that comes around. Very quickly, I just wanted to ask you, Sen. Bernie Sanders used the term genocide. It’s the first time a US senator is using that term about what’s been taking place in Gaza over the last nearly two years. You know, it’s Bernie Sanders, so it’s not all that shocking that he would be the first US elected official to use that term. But what do we think happens after this?

Jacob Magid: Yeah, I think it’s somewhat noteworthy because he had been pushing back on the use of the term and saying it’s a legal term that he doesn’t want to get into. But as you mentioned, it’s not particularly surprising, given that he’s been one of the most vocal critics of the Israeli government in the Senate and probably in Congress more broadly.

In the House, you have had several people actually on both parties because one of them is Marjorie Taylor Greene [US representative for Georgia’s 14th congressional district], who has used the term genocide. And there’s also been Democrats like [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] AOC [US representative for New York’s 14th congressional district] and Rashida Tlaib [US representative for Michigan’s 12th congressional district], who have also characterized Israel’s war in the same way.

But I think against the backdrop of this UN commission that referred to the war as a genocide, and there have been others, even Israeli human rights groups that are increasingly using the term as well. I think it was only a matter of time that Sanders would also fall into that list of people who are characterizing the war as such.

Jessica Steinberg: Yeah, I hear that.

Okay, Jacob, thank you so much. It’s been really helpful to get your thoughts, hear about your reporting, and go forward into another day to see what it will all bring. So thanks for that.

Jacob Magid: Thanks for having me, Jessica.

Jessica Steinberg: For sure. And thanks to you for listening to The Times Israel’s Daily Briefing. Stay tuned for tomorrow’s installment. This episode is produced by The Podwaves. Any comments, as always, you can drop us an email, podcast@timesofisrael.com. And until next time, take care. Be well. See you soon.

Check out yesterday’s episode here: