Although it can bring hostility to stop, the plan remains ambiguous on a possible two -way solution of a lengthy conflict. It also seems to give Israel a free hand if Hamas refuses the proposal, puts off deep -rooted resources of the conflict and remains deliberately ambiguous on the way to Palestinian statehood.
Although it could end violence, if Hamas accepted, “only peace” would remain elusive.
What does a peace plan require?
Trump’s plan proposes an immediate ceasefire and freezing of current battle lines until it is possible to complete the gradual Israeli withdrawal. It requires Hamas to completely disarm and give up any control role. It focuses on the reconstruction of the “new Gaza”, includes international stability security guarantees and suggests that the Palestinian authority (PA) could eventually follow the territory, but only after implementing the necessary reform program.
If the plan is accepted, it says that all hostages, feeding and deceased, will be returned and assistance will be immediately sent to the Gaza lane in quantity in accordance with those entrusted with January 19, 2025.
The proposal requires Gaza to temporarily follow the technocratic Apolitical Palestinian Committee responsible for the daily operation of public services and municipalities.
It is also invited by the new international transient body, the “Peace Council”, which will be headed by President Trump and includes former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. “This body sets the framework and manages financing to rebuild Gaza until the Palestinian authority completes its reform program … and can safely and effectively take control of Gaza,” reads …
It is said that Israel will not occupy the Gaza attachment and that the US will cooperate with Arab and international partners on the development of temporary international stabilization forces (ISF) on immediately deployment in Gaza. Since ISF determines control and stability, the Israeli defensive force (IDF) will gradually withdraw.
While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly adopted a proposal for peace, while apparently there was a solution to the Igic possibility of solving two states, Hamas still has to call. If the plan rejects, President Trump promised his “full support” to continue the war and “finish the work of destroying the threat of Hamas”.
Does this give Israel an advantage?
Trump’s 20-point plan reflects many of the Israeli goals: the release of the hostages, the dismantling of Hamas, the de-thermalization of Gaza, the creation of temporary international administration supported by US warranties and assistance in reconstruction of Gaza.
Even more importantly, this remains deliberately ambiguous on the way to Palestinian statehood. It is reported that after the reconstruction of the Gaza, PA implements the ordered reform program, “conditions can finally be introduced for a trusted path to Palestinian self -determination and statehood”.
Although the plan offers obvious political profits for Netanyahu, it creates a main domestic political risk. His far -right coalition partners and key parts of his political base require nothing but an overall, unconditional surrender of Hamas, who does not guarantee the plan. This disagreement could lead to the collapse of his coalition and potentially end his political career.
What does it mean for Hamas and PA?
The plan seals Hamas’s fate and deprives him of political and military power. If he decides to accept the plan, he will have to give up control over the Gaza band to the Peace Council. The plan also outlines the clear plan of the destruction of “military, terror and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and equipment for the production of weapons” and demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors. Members of Hamas, who are in line with these goals and commit themselves to “peaceful existence”, will be awarded amnesties, while those who want to leave will be ensured safe passage to admission countries.
It is important that the proposal offers PA the way to achieve Palestinian self-determination and statehood-a result that would require PA to successfully complete certain administration reforms. By binding the future of Palestinian statehood on the performance and cooperation of PA with the international transition, the plan attempts to strengthen long -term legitimacy and control P
How did the countries react in the region?
While a common statement from eight Arab and Muslim majority-Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Sae, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar and Egypt-nahrh did not express his “bilateral solution” as a step towards “advanced peace”.
However, the path to an independent Palestinian state remains the main demand for the region. The statement of the support of the Palestinian Office was to specify rapidly that the final comprehensive agreement must “prepare a way for a fair peace based on the solution of two states, with an independent and sovereign state of Palestine living side by side.” And Prime Minister Katar said that Arab and Islamic countries made all efforts to ensure that two states were achieved.
Dr. Shweta Singh is a associate professor at the Department of International Relations at the University of South Asian.
(Tagstotranslate) Palestinian statehood
