US President Donald Trump described his plan for ending the war in Gaza as potentially one of the greatest days in the history of civilisation, claiming it could bring “eternal peace in the Middle East.” While this hyperbolic statement is characteristic of Trump, his 20-point proposal, announced at the White House on Monday during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, represents a significant diplomatic step — albeit one that does not fully live up to his grandiose claims.

The plan indicates a shift in the Trump administration’s position regarding a post-war future for Gaza and places greater pressure on Netanyahu to accept a deal than Washington has applied so far this year. Yet, whether this proposal can become a reality in the coming weeks depends heavily on a fundamental issue: whether both Netanyahu and the leadership of Hamas now see greater benefits in ending the war than in continuing it.

### Hamas Response and Israeli Acceptance

Hamas’ response to the proposal remains unclear. A pessimistic assessment came from one Hamas figure who hinted to the BBC that the terms largely failed to safeguard Palestinian interests. The group reportedly will not accept any plan that does not guarantee Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu, standing alongside President Trump, announced Israel’s acceptance of Trump’s 20 principles. However, a leader from the far-right flank of Netanyahu’s coalition had already rejected some of the points. Acceptance of these principles does not guarantee an end to the war. Netanyahu’s domestic opponents accuse him of having a history of undermining emerging deals if they threaten his political position at home.

### Challenges Ahead

The proposal faces significant obstacles among political constituencies in both Israel and Hamas that could prevent a final agreement. Additionally, enough ambiguity in the plan allows either side to appear to accept it publicly while using further negotiations to sabotage the deal, blaming the other party for any failure — a pattern seen in previous months of negotiations.

If that occurs, the Trump administration has made clear it will side firmly with Israel. On Monday, Trump told Netanyahu that if Hamas did not agree to the proposal, Israel would have America’s “full backing to do what you would have to do.”

### A Framework, Not a Detailed Plan

Though Trump presented the proposal as a deal, it is in reality a framework for further negotiations — or as he described it, a series of “principles.” This falls short of the detailed agreement required to end the war. It is similar to the “framework” that President Joe Biden announced in May 2024 aimed at a phased ceasefire and eventual end to hostilities. In that case, it took another eight months before a truce and a hostage-prisoner exchange were implemented between Israel and Hamas.

### Key Elements of the Trump Proposal

The plan calls for:

– A halt to fighting
– Limited withdrawal of Israeli forces
– Hamas releasing all remaining hostages
– Israel releasing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners
– Establishment of a local technocratic administration in Gaza to manage day-to-day services, overseen by a “Board of Peace” based in Egypt and chaired by Trump
– Amnesty for Palestinian fighters who commit to peaceful coexistence and decommission weapons; others to be exiled
– An international stabilization force, created by the US and Arab countries, to take over security in Gaza and ensure the demilitarization of Palestinian armed factions

Palestinian statehood is mentioned but only vaguely. The plan suggests that if the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority is reformed, conditions “may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.”

### Regional Reactions

Arab countries consider Trump’s proposals a significant breakthrough, especially as it replaces his February Gaza “Riviera” plan, which involved the forced displacement of Palestinians. The mention of Palestinian statehood, even without a firm commitment, is seen as progress. The plan includes a vital clause stating that “Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza,” a key point for Arab nations, although this is somewhat contradicted by another clause allowing Israel to maintain forces in Gaza’s “security perimeter.”

On the Israeli side, Netanyahu claims the framework aligns with his objectives to disarm Hamas, demilitarize Gaza, and prevent the creation of a future Palestinian state. It remains uncertain whether his government’s far-right elements will accept the disarmament and statehood clauses, or whether Netanyahu might seek to modify the plan further under political pressure.

### The Road Ahead

Much depends now on Hamas’ response. As noted by BBC’s Rushdi Abu Alouf, this may be another “Yes, but” moment where Hamas appears to accept the proposals while demanding clarifications.

This dynamic presents the same challenge previously encountered by the White House and other mediators: frameworks and principles seem promising but often stall in detailed negotiations. Notably, just before the joint announcement, Trump secured an apology from Netanyahu to Qatar for an Israeli airstrike targeting Hamas leadership in Doha earlier this month. This development should allow Qatar to rejoin as a mediator between Israel and Hamas.

### Context on the Ground

As the proposal was announced, Israeli shelling and airstrikes intensified in Gaza City, where the IDF deployed a third armoured division. Israel’s expanding assault seeks to pressure Hamas but has caused further civilian devastation, drawing international condemnation.

Hamas’ commander in Gaza, Ez al-Din al-Haddad, is reportedly preparing for a “final decisive battle” with approximately 5,000 fighters. Meanwhile, European and Arab countries, especially France and Saudi Arabia, have spent the summer attempting to revive diplomacy, alarmed by Israel’s conduct and the conflict’s worsening humanitarian crisis.

### International Implications

Israel faces increasing international isolation, with Netanyahu under an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant for alleged war crimes in Gaza. European nations fear the conflict could escalate uncontrollably, empowering extremists on both sides. They hope to appeal to moderates to achieve a two-state solution as a long-term resolution for Israelis and Palestinians — an outcome not explicitly outlined in Trump’s current plan.

However, these countries view Trump’s moderated Gaza proposal as a crucial step toward shifting momentum back to negotiations.

### Conclusion

While Trump’s new Gaza peace plan provides a diplomatic framework designed to end the war, transforming it into a comprehensive peace agreement will require meticulous work. Detailed issues such as Israeli withdrawal lines, the conditions for releasing hostages and prisoners, and post-war governance arrangements remain unresolved and could derail progress.

This process is likely to take many weeks, if not longer, to develop into the kind of lasting peace Trump envisions — one that effectively concludes hostilities and lays the foundation for a stable future in the region.
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trumps-gaza-plan-significant-step-021836140.html