The latest Gaza roadmap sets out a layered enforcement model rather than a single enforcer. On paper, Hamas and other armed factions are to surrender or decommission heavy weapons, military production sites, depots and tunnels. Israel is to withdraw in phases. Movement from one stage to the next depends on verified completion of prior commitments.
The central verification body is the International Verification Committee, or IVC. According to the text published by the Associated Press, the IVC would be established by the Board of Peace and include representatives from the guarantors, the Board of Peace and the International Stabilization Force. Its role is to certify whether each side has met its obligations and to observe violations through an enhanced monitoring mechanism.
Actual handling of weapons would sit mainly with the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, or NCAG. The roadmap says heavy weapons, militia weapons and police weapons are to come under NCAG authority, not Israeli control. Personal weapons would also be regulated by NCAG under Palestinian law. The text states that, at the end of the process, only NCAG should hold, store or control weapons in Gaza.
The International Stabilization Force, or ISF, is the security backstop. Its stated role is to separate Israeli forces from NCAG-controlled areas, monitor ceasefire compliance, support humanitarian access, train Palestinian police and support NCAG in non-policing tasks. The roadmap says the ISF will not perform ordinary policing inside Palestinian society.
That division matters. The IVC verifies. NCAG administers and controls the weapons process. The ISF supports, monitors and separates forces. The Board of Peace supervises the framework. The UN Security Council has authorized the broader international mechanism through Resolution 2803.
But the main enforcement gap is coercion. The roadmap does not clearly describe what happens if Hamas refuses to surrender weapons, if militias do not comply, or if Israel does not withdraw after verification. In those cases, enforcement would likely depend on political pressure from guarantor states, Security Council backing, donor leverage, and the willingness of the ISF and NCAG to operate in contested areas.
So the answer is: no single actor “enforces” the deal alone. Verification is assigned to the IVC; weapons custody and internal implementation to NCAG; field stabilization to the ISF; and political oversight to the Board of Peace and guarantor states. Whether that amounts to real enforcement depends on whether those bodies have access, personnel, authority and political backing when either side contests the sequence.
Sources used: AP text of the roadmap, AP report from Gaza, UN Security Council coverage.
