Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal drops a bombshell: "Hamas can stay in power in Gaza"

In a provocative interview with Arab News, Prince Turki al-Faisal, former Saudi ambassador to the United States and United Kingdom sharply criticized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, branding it "ethnic cleansing," and rejected calls for Gulf and Arab states to fund the territory’s reconstruction, insisting that Israel bear the cost.

The prince led Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Directorate from 1977 to 2001 before serving as ambassador to London (2003–2005) and Washington (2005–2006). His remarks come at a pivotal moment, with Egypt set to unveil a plan to sideline Hamas via a civilian "Governance Assistance Mission" and an Arab-led "International Stabilization Force," while the United States and Israel push for the group’s complete removal from power.

"Israel must be forced to rehabilitate the infrastructure that it destroyed," he told Arab News. "We cannot continue to rebuild Gaza only for Israel to come and destroy everything again, whether in Gaza or the West Bank. It’s inconceivable," he added.

His use of "ethnic cleansing" to describe Israel’s actions marks a sharper tone than the official Saudi line under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

A Controversial Vision for Hamas

When pressed on Hamas’s future role in Gaza, where it has ruled since ousting the Palestinian Authority (PA) in 2007, al-Faisal offered a stance that has raised eyebrows across the region and beyond. "There are those in the organization with the right priorities, those who care first and foremost about Gaza’s residents. They can continue—these are the people who should lead Gaza," he said. This nuanced position suggests a distinction between Hamas’s military wing—responsible for the 2023 attack and ongoing rocket barrages—and its political and administrative arms, which have managed Gaza’s civilian affairs, from education to welfare, amid chronic blockade and poverty.

This view starkly contrasts with prevailing international sentiment. The United States, under President Donald Trump, has adamantly opposed any continued Hamas leadership, aligning with Israel’s goal of dismantling the group’s governance capacity. Trump’s "Gaza Riviera" proposal, which envisioned clearing Palestinians from the enclave for redevelopment, has fueled Arab outrage, prompting Egypt’s counterplan and al-Faisal’s sharp rebuke. Meanwhile, Hamas itself has rejected external impositions, with senior official Sami Abu Zuhri recently telling Reuters, "The day after in Gaza must only be decided by the Palestinians," dismissing foreign forces or non-Palestinian administration.

Reconstruction Burden and Regional Tensions

Al-Faisal’s firm stance against Gulf and Arab states funding Gaza’s reconstruction—estimated by the U.N. at over $53 billion—reflects a broader regional reluctance to bankroll recovery without assurances of stability. Egypt’s draft proposal, set for the Arab League summit, ties significant international funding to Hamas’s removal, a condition echoed by states like the UAE, which views Hamas as an extension of Iran-backed Islamist threats. Saudi Arabia, alongside Qatar and the UAE, has been floated as a potential donor, but al-Faisal’s insists that Gulf capitals should not perpetually foot the bill for conflicts they did not ignite.

This position underscores a tension within Saudi policy. Under Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom has pursued pragmatic engagement with Israel, driven by mutual interests in countering Iran—whose military ties with Russia deepened in 2024 with missile specialist visits to Tehran—and advancing economic diversification. Yet, public support for Palestinians remains a domestic pressure point, and al-Faisal’s outspokenness may serve as a release valve for sentiments the leadership hesitates to amplify officially. His critique comes as Saudi-Israel normalization talks, paused by the war, linger in limbo, with Riyadh conditioning progress on a credible path to Palestinian statehood.

A Veteran Voice in a Shifting Landscape

Al-Faisal’s career lends weight to his words. As intelligence chief, he oversaw Saudi Arabia’s role in funding Afghan mujahideen against the Soviets, forging ties with the U.S. that he later nurtured as ambassador. His tenure in Washington ended amid tensions over the Iraq War, but he retained a reputation as a diplomat attuned to Arab concerns. Now outside the inner circle of Mohammed bin Salman’s reform-driven regime, he speaks through Arab News—a Saudi-owned outlet—where his critiques of Israel have intensified since the Gaza war began.

Hamas has maintained support in Gaza through social services and defiance of Israel, even as its military actions draw devastating reprisals. Al-Faisal’s call could imply a reformed Hamas stripped of its militant arm—a model floated in past PA reconciliation talks but never realized—or simply a pragmatic acceptance of its staying power absent a viable alternative.

Challenges and Broader Implications

Implementing al-Faisal’s vision would face daunting obstacles. Hamas’s military and political wings are deeply intertwined, and Israel’s insistence on its eradication—backed by U.S. military aid—leaves little room for compromise. The PA, weakened by corruption and lack of popular support, struggles to assert control over Gaza, while Egypt’s plan for an Arab-led interim body sidesteps elections or a clear role for existing Palestinian factions. Al-Faisal’s silence on how to separate Hamas’s "pragmatic" elements or enforce Israel’s reconstruction responsibility highlights the gap between rhetoric and practicality.

As the Arab League summit looms, al-Faisal’s remarks amplify a fractured debate. Egypt seeks to dismantle Hamas’s rule, Western powers back a PA-led transition, and Gulf states weigh funding against security concerns. The prince’s suggestion of accommodating Hamas’s "better angels" offers a third path—one that might resonate with Palestinians weary of foreign dictates but risks alienating allies like the U.S., which recently paused aid to Ukraine amid its own geopolitical shifts. Whether his voice shapes Saudi policy or remains a lone critique, it underscores the high stakes as Gaza’s future hangs in the balance.