In a lengthy report on Friday, the New York Times says that as the war in Gaza continues, there is increasing talk of a “day after” formula for the torn Strip, but this idea is fleeting – there will be no bright line between war and peace in Gaza. Even if some sort of negotiated settlement is reached.

According to the report, “Israel has made clear that it will not concede security along its southern border to anyone else, and Israeli military officials say that their forces will enter and exit Gaza based on intelligence for a very long time to come, even after the forces finally withdraw.”

The newspaper quotes Aaron David Miller, a former American official in the midst of peace negotiations during the era of former President Bill Clinton, and an official at the Carnegie Foundation in Washington, as saying: “We must abandon the entire concept of the ‘next day’, because that is misleading and dangerous,” because There will be no clear dividing line "between the end of Israeli military operations and relative stability that allows people to focus on reconstruction."

There are a variety of vague ideas – “plans” may be too specific – of what happens in the aftermath of military actions. But there is a growing understanding that any sustainable settlement requires a regional agreement that includes countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Qatar.

Such a deal would certainly have to be led by the United States, Israel's most trusted ally, and most officials and analysts assume it would require new governments in both Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which partly governs the West Bank but is considered outdated and corrupt, an indication of the long road ahead. "Waiting for us," according to the report.

It is noteworthy that the US special envoy, Brett McGurk, is touring the region, and is focusing on “the possibility of reaching another hostage deal, which will require a humanitarian truce for some time to accomplish this,” according to a White House spokesman, John Kirby, and McGurk will be joined in the coming days by CIA Director William Burns.

Sources indicate that McGurk's efforts are complicated, as he works through Qatar, which in turn delivers messages to Hamas leaders. Even if a preliminary agreement is reached between Israel and Hamas, both sides will have to negotiate a gradual exchange of hostages, women and children first, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons.

“The release of all hostages, including soldiers, would require the controversial release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including those convicted of killing Israelis,” the report says. Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, was just such a case, as he was He was released in a previous prisoner exchange in 2011 after 23 years in prison.

The newspaper asks: “Then there is a question about (Yahya) Sinwar and other Hamas leaders, if they are alive - will they go into exile as part of any settlement? Currently, Hamas rejects this idea; but the first hostage deal is an indispensable condition” according to experts, it is the largest regional deal for the administration.

American officials hope that this will open the way for broader negotiations, “including moderate Sunni Arab countries that have little love for Hamas and its main backer, Shiite Iran, and which are concerned about Iran’s growing power.”

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu supports efforts to reach a hostage deal, he is also campaigning for his political survival and opposing an important pillar of President Biden's larger concept.

US President Joe Biden said he would like a “revitalized Palestinian Authority” to eventually manage Gaza as a stage toward a “two-state solution” and an independent, largely demilitarized Palestine, alongside Israel and committed to lasting peace.

Netanyahu portrays himself as the only person who can prevent the Americans from imposing a Palestinian state on a shell-shocked Israel or imposing significant restrictions on Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank that is gradually absorbing Palestinian land.

“But the Americans believe they may have important influence on Israel and on Netanyahu going forward,” the report says. “Saudi Arabia, a major regional player, has indicated that it wants to continue the path toward normalization with Israel in exchange for American security guarantees against Iran, which is in itself a demand.” Controversial, but Saudi Arabia has also said that normalization, let alone any cooperation on a post-Gaza future, whether on reconstruction or security aid, depends on establishing an “irreversible” path toward a Palestinian state, which Netanyahu rejects.

According to the newspaper, Netanyahu’s vision for the future of Gaza is unclear, as he continues to insist that Hamas will be “destroyed” and that he will be able to release all the hostages, “but these goals seem more contradictory as the Israeli military operation in Gaza moves slowly and losses increase on both sides.” “This creates more local and international pressure on him.”

Netanyahu repeats that Hamas's military and political presence in Gaza is unacceptable. Giving the Palestinian Authority control over Gaza is unacceptable. Any foreign peacekeeping forces are rejected; An independent Palestinian state is also rejected. While he denied his desire to reoccupy Gaza in the long term, he insisted that Israel retain security control not only over Gaza, but also over the West Bank.

His far-right partners, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, proposed displacing Palestinian citizens and returning Israeli settlers to Gaza, which led to a limited American rebuke.

The newspaper quotes former US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, as saying that opposition members in the current Israeli security cabinet, such as Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, who are seen as popular alternatives to Netanyahu, are likely to agree to the American idea of reaching a Larger regional agreement. The same applies to Defense Minister Yoav Galant, who distanced himself from Netanyahu. Indyk said that everyone realizes that American support is indispensable to Israel.

It is noteworthy that Galant, who is from the Likud Party led by Netanyahu, developed a vague plan, through which he wants Israel to maintain its security control over Gaza, with the Israeli army being free to enter and leave as needed. It is proposed that Egypt and Israel control the southern border crossing into Gaza together. There will also be no Israeli civilian (settlement) presence in Gaza (in his vision), with a civil administration run by Palestinians under foreign supervision, but not by the Palestinian Authority.

Gallant's plan is believed to be similar to what Netanyahu secretly believes, but Gallant also partly reflects the view of the Israeli military, (said Nahum Barnea, a well-connected columnist for the popular daily Yedioth Ahronoth).

He said: "The vision (Gallant's vision) is not victory, but rather an intermittent and managed conflict without a permanent and significant Israeli presence."

The army wants to transform Gaza into something closer to the situation in the cities of the occupied northern West Bank, such as Nablus and Jenin, where it (the occupation army) goes wherever it wants. In Gaza, the plan envisions operating from a buffer zone inside Gaza, which is now being built, and penetrating deep into the area from time to time in specific operations.

No one believes there is a quick deal to be done, as “US officials estimate that training about 6,000 Palestinian security forces to monitor Gaza, even in cooperation with some multinational Arab forces, will take up to 10 months.”

In the meantime, they hope that Arab countries, and perhaps Turkey, will agree to monitor Gaza. This is a highly questionable ambition, given the political sensitivity of Muslim countries that would monitor the Palestinians in part on behalf of Israeli security.

So there's no quick path to "RPA," the Biden administration's newest shorthand for "revitalized PA." Senior US officials say this would require at a minimum the retirement of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas or his status as “emeritus president,” internal reforms and some form of Palestinian elections.

It is noteworthy that the last elections were held in 2006, and it is almost certain that the new elections will lead to giving Hamas an important political role. They say there should be an interim administration in Gaza made up of Palestinian notables or technocrats in the meantime.

According to Indyk, “The Palestinians themselves are not ready, there is a complete disconnect between the international community’s call for a two-state solution and the willingness of Israelis and Palestinians to consider it now as a viable means of ending their conflict.”

However, he said, Washington "must try to forge a new, more stable regime in Gaza, and this cannot be done without establishing a credible political horizon that ultimately leads to a two-state solution."

Despite the huge task facing American diplomacy, time is limited — perhaps only until September, officials say — and that could create pressure to act. Netanyahu is aware that Biden is a candidate for re-election next November, and he may want to see what will happen in the American vote.

Arab interlocutors are also fully aware that unless some kind of deal is reached by the fall, Biden may lose the election, and they are waiting for the unpredictable Donald Trump. Even senior American officials believe that the best chance of reaching an agreement is Biden's re-election, a senior Western diplomat admitted.

The newspaper attributed to Yaakov Amidror, the former general and Israeli National Security Advisor, that he believes that the year 2024 is the year of low-intensity war. Amidror, now a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies, a conservative think tank, said the next year or 18 months will be devoted to finding and destroying Hamas tunnels, infrastructure and fighters.

He added that ultimately, by mid-2025, he believes Hamas will no longer have the military and political capacity to administer Gaza. He added that the Israeli army may be in a position to operate in Gaza similar to its model in the West Bank.

The report concludes: “Therefore, even with the best intentions, there is a long road ahead toward the true ‘next day,’ and many possible ways for the best plans to fail. Perhaps most important, despite all American efforts, is if war breaks out between Israel and Hezbollah.” In southern Lebanon, which may make the devastation in Gaza seem like a mere prelude.”