The United States is advancing a draft U.N. Security Council resolution to deploy a multinational interim security force to Gaza, aimed at enforcing a recently brokered ceasefire, according to a person familiar with the plans. The initiative would establish an ISF whose mandate runs until the end of 2027, at which point its continuation would require renewal in consultation with Israel, Egypt and members of the Security Council.

The agreement underpinning the resolution calls for the “immediate” deployment of the force, underscoring the urgency Washington and its partners attach to stabilizing Gaza as humanitarian relief moves in and combat operations have paused. Senior policy analysts have argued that a rapid international presence could have reduced civilian casualties and prevented security vacuums in the early days of the ceasefire, a view echoed by regional experts who say preventing a relapse is the key objective.

The current working draft does not include any reporting requirement to the Security Council, and Israel has pressed to keep it that way, according to the source. That omission reflects a fundamental tension: some U.N. members want tight oversight and regular Council briefings, while Israel prefers a more autonomous arrangement with less multilateral scrutiny. “At the moment, there aren’t any major issues for us — the question is whether it will stay that way,” the official said. “Some countries will try to increase the Security Council’s involvement as much as possible, and Israel will seek to prevent that.”

Those internal dynamics will shape how the resolution is received in New York. Even with U.S. sponsorship, passage in the Security Council is not assured. Permanent members have divergent geopolitical interests in the region and differing views on U.N. peace operations, while a clear mandate is essential for defining the force’s rules of engagement, command relationships and humanitarian access roles. The draft’s emphasis on renewal through consultations with Israel and Egypt signals an effort to balance Israeli security prerogatives and Egyptian concerns about border control and refugee flows.

Legal and diplomatic questions loom. A U.N.-mandated force typically operates with a mandate that specifies reporting obligations and oversight mechanisms; the absence of such requirements in the draft could complicate the Council’s ability to monitor implementation and adapt to changing conditions. Moreover, the scale and composition of the ISF, its rules for using force, and its relationship to Palestinian authorities and local communities will determine whether it is perceived as an impartial stabilizing presence or an occupation-like force.

International experts note that the most effective deployed forces combine clear legal mandates with local legitimacy and regional buy-in. While the Trump administration’s move places Washington at the center of Gaza’s immediate governance, it also places the United States in a delicate diplomatic role between Israel and other regional and international actors. As the mandate period extends toward 2027, the durability of the ceasefire will hinge on whether the multinational force can secure consent, deliver protection and coordinate humanitarian and reconstruction efforts without exacerbating political tensions.