Trump’s “Peace” deal: A roadmap to resolution or a recipe for deadlock?

Only a few hours after Trump unveiled his proposal for peace in Gaza, reactions began to vary.

At first glance, Trump’s 20-point plan—endorsed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and welcomed by several regional leaders—appears more capable than any previous plan of ending the two-year conflict in Gaza. Yet, the proposal is less a detailed roadmap and more a hasty and superficial draft that, while seemingly promising, could just as easily lose direction.

Key points of the plan

One of the most important clauses stipulates that, upon the release of all hostages, Israel will free 250 prisoners serving life sentences along with 1,700 Gaza residents detained after October 7, 2023.

Within 72 hours of Israel’s formal acceptance of the ceasefire agreement, all hostages—whether alive or deceased—are to be returned.

Once hostages are released, Hamas members who pledge to peaceful coexistence and surrender their weapons will be granted amnesty.

With the signing of the agreement, humanitarian aid will be sent immediately to Gaza, with entry and distribution managed under UN supervision without interference from either side.

According to Trump’s plan, Gaza’s administration would temporarily be handed to a Palestinian technocratic committee with no political affiliation. This body would function under a newly established international entity called the “Peace Council.”

Obstacles to the plan

The Wall Street Journal wrote that analysts and officials warned of evident obstacles. Hamas’s agreement remains uncertain. Meanwhile, Arab states are unlikely to deploy troops if Israel continues to target Hamas in Gaza. Likewise, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the besieged enclave before the release of captives seems improbable.

The interim governing authority Trump proposes, which includes former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair as a member, may also struggle for legitimacy within Gaza.

The Guardian noted that Trump claims Arab states have committed to the demilitarization of Gaza, yet there is no sign of what that means in practice. Will they send troops, money, or both? None have made clear commitments, and any such mission—complex and dangerous—would take months to organize, leaving room for disputes and mutual accusations.

The paper added that tying Israel’s withdrawal to the pace of disarmament benefits Tel Aviv. Israel might eventually retreat to a border zone, but the timeline is unclear. The published maps are vague. None of this aligns with Hamas’s recent negotiation demands, nor is there any promise of establishing a Palestinian state.

The Guardian further noted that, with internal divisions deepening, anti-war sentiment growing, and mounting diplomatic failures, Netanyahu may now calculate that prolonging the war would only cost him dearly. He may have concluded it is time to declare victory—and this time, he seems confident he can overcome resistance from far-right coalition partners who could otherwise collapse his government.

Reactions to Trump’s plan

Only hours after the announcement, senior Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi told Al Jazeera: “Trump’s proposal has not reached us or any Palestinian party.” He added that Hamas had no prior knowledge of it, and its provisions align closely with Israel’s views. He emphasized that resistance weapons are not for aggression but for freedom and independence, and described the plan as vague and lacking guarantees.

He stressed: “We will not accept any proposal that denies Palestinians the right to self-determination or fails to protect them from massacre and genocide.”

Israeli political leaders also responded.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called Trump’s plan a “clear diplomatic failure,” adding: “In the end, it is we who will be left in tears.”

Opposition leader Yair Lapid said the proposal has existed for over a year and a half, lamenting that thousands of lives could have been saved if it had been implemented earlier.

Avigdor Lieberman, head of the Yisrael Beiteinu party, said any plan that brings back hostages should be welcomed.

Yair Golan, head of the Democrats Party in the occupied territories, declared that no solution with Hamas exists other than creating an alternative government in Gaza. He expressed hope for the hostages’ return and an end to the political war, stressing that the conflict long ago ceased to serve security purposes and that Trump’s plan should have been signed much earlier.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that Trump’s plan represents the best immediate chance to end the Gaza war, and she added that the EU stands ready to assist in making it succeed.