During his address to the Knesset in Israel on Monday, President Donald Trump declared the “” of a new Middle East. Following Trump’s announcement of a Gaza ceasefire last week, Israel’s continuous of Gaza has paused, Hamas has begun freeing Israeli hostages, crucial humanitarian aid including food and medicine has commenced entry into Gaza, and arrangements are being made for approximately 2,000 Palestinians detained by Israel to be released.

Beyond these crucial initial actions, which form the first stage of Trump’s , the temporary halt of far-right initiatives to compel Palestinians out of Gaza is noteworthy.

However, Gaza, as it once was, is now . In the last two years, of Gaza’s populace has been killed or injured; roughly 90% of its has been displaced; 78% of all buildings are either destroyed or damaged; of medical facilities are no longer operational; and 90% of the have sustained damage or been demolished. Confronted with a desolate landscape, hundreds of thousands of uprooted Palestinians have been through the catastrophic remnants of their communities and residences.

The reconstruction of Gaza would demand tens of billions of dollars and many decades. Given this catastrophic situation, President Trump’s proposal essentially represents a hostage exchange agreement, an indefinite ceasefire, and an act of hope.

An imprecise, insubstantial strategy

The 20-point lacks specifics and foundational principles. Who will govern Gaza during this interim period? Who will provide the billions needed for rebuilding without an enduring political resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute? The framework states that Israel will neither “occupy or annex Gaza” nor will Hamas possess any direct or indirect involvement in Gaza’s administration. It proposes a provisional government of technocrats headed by , the past British Prime Minister, and overseen by a “board of peace” led by President Trump.

The expectation is that this will facilitate the Palestinian Authority’s return to govern Gaza, once it fulfills a set of requirements and assessments, after which, circumstances might at last allow for a “credible route to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.”  

The ambiguous commitment to a “pathway” toward Palestinian autonomy recalls prior discussions, where the prospect of an eventual Palestinian state served as a smokescreen to obscure an already brutal, inequitable, and volatile situation; this, as expected, resulted in the extensive conflict observed over the last two years.

A hesitant compromise

For enduring peace to be realized, the end of hostilities must be succeeded by fundamental changes leading to Palestinian liberty and sovereignty, coexisting peacefully with Israel.

Even though of all Americans view Israeli conduct in Gaza as genocide and a of Jewish Americans perceive it as war crimes, Trump has seldom shown compassion for Palestinian non-combatants or appeared affected by their hardships. His initial proposals for Gaza featured a strategy that its inhabitants. Similar to President Joe Biden, Trump UN Security Council resolutions advocating for a cessation of hostilities. Throughout the talks, and in his prominent social media message declaring the ceasefire, Trump’s declared priority has mainly centered on the liberation of Israeli captives.

The Israeli administration likewise this accord as a hostage exchange arrangement. They consider the ceasefire and to a demarcation, which diminishes Israeli military dominance over Gaza from over 80% of the strip’s territory to 58%, as the cost for the hostages’ return. There is currently no indication that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the hardliners in his cabinet have been completely persuaded by this understanding to forsake their declared expansionist objectives in Gaza and the West Bank.

A potential hazard exists that they could perceive any ambiguity within the agreement as a chance to probe the situation. Any event, from Hamas’s unwillingness to agree to the conditions of a transitional phase, to full disarmament, or an act of violence, might serve as an excuse to break the ceasefire. By breaching the in March, Netanyahu has already shown that he requires minimal justification to disregard an agreement if it no longer aligns with his wider strategic and political aims.

For the initial stage of the accord to be enacted, Hamas has consented to free all Israeli captives it holds, both living and deceased. This marks a significant development, as the faction had previously maintained that the release of all hostages was contingent upon a full Israeli pullout from Gaza.

In Israel, public outrage has understandably centered on compelling the Netanyahu administration to recover the hostages held by Hamas. Hamas, for its part, viewed retaining the Israeli captives as bargaining power, crucial for securing the release of Palestinian detainees. Few grasp the full of the prisoner issue among Palestinians, as of Palestinians have faced arrest over decades of occupation, often without due process, impacting almost every household. Israel currently around 11,000 Palestinians, including approximately 400 minors, and maintains the ability to apprehend many more at will. Israel will also be releasing roughly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners held without formal accusations, with the majority apprehended in the last two years.

Evidently, the compulsion on Hamas to agree to the freeing of all Israeli captives in the initial stage must have been immense. by Qatar and Turkey that retaining the hostages had evolved into a detriment rather than an advantage for the organization. The release of hostages is also expected to provide Netanyahu with considerably greater political flexibility domestically regarding Gaza policy.

An enduring tranquility

To achieve an enduring resolution to the dispute, the American president’s endeavors would need to be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. Regarding Israel and Palestine, every U.S. president in recent decades, including Trump, has contributed to the issue rather than its resolution. President Biden is particularly notable for his insensitive facilitation of the atrocities committed in Gaza for over a year. During Trump’s tenure, Israel over 20 children daily with full American military, financial, and diplomatic backing.

Nonetheless, it would represent a remarkable accomplishment if President Trump manages to forge a fair and lasting conclusion to the Israeli-Palestinian contention. For such an outcome, Trump would be required to undertake an action no American president has accomplished in recent decades: Cease protecting Israel from the repercussions of its expansionist conduct that transgresses global laws and standards.

It might necessitate an unorthodox, unpredictable president such as Trump to bring it to fruition. However, presuming he possesses sufficient concern, capacity, or aptitude to succeed involves an excessive amount of optimism. It is merely a wish.