In a significant development aimed at addressing the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, U.S. President Donald Trump introduced a new peace proposal on Monday alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This proposal, while ambitious, has already drawn skepticism from experts who question its viability, especially given that many of its demands have previously been dismissed by Hamas.
The centerpiece of Trump’s plan is an immediate cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hamas. In a notable exchange, Hamas would be required to release all hostages within a 72-hour timeframe following the agreement, while Israel would reciprocate by freeing 250 individuals serving life sentences and releasing 1,700 Gazans detained after the October 7, 2023, attacks.
However, the proposed deal notably omits a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which has been a longstanding demand of Hamas. Instead, it hints at the possibility of a pathway to Palestinian statehood—a notion that has gained traction among several countries historically allied with Israel.
A novel aspect of Trump’s proposal is the establishment of a Board of Peace, an international transitional body that he would personally oversee. This board aims to provide guidance and supervision to a committee composed of Palestinians and international experts. Prominently featured in this board would be former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has been vocal about his own peace initiatives in the region.
In contrast to Blair’s approach, which relies on a United Nations-mandated administration, Trump’s plan suggests the formation of a new civilian-led government in Gaza, explicitly excluding both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA), which currently administers parts of the West Bank. Trump and Netanyahu have stated that the PA could be reintegrated into governance only after it undergoes what Netanyahu described as a “radical and complete transformation.” This requirement stands in stark opposition to the New York declaration, a peace proposal endorsed by 142 nations that advocates for PA governance in Gaza.
Additional stipulations in Trump’s proposal include unimpeded humanitarian aid to Gaza, the implementation of an economic development plan aimed at revitalizing the region, and the encouragement of displaced Palestinians to return to their homes. This shift represents a notable departure from Trump’s earlier stance, where he suggested relocating all Palestinians from Gaza as part of a real estate vision for a “Riviera of the Middle East.”
Despite the ambitious nature of the proposal, the specter of violence looms large. Trump underscored that should Hamas reject the U.S.-led initiative, “Israel would have my full backing to finish the job of destroying the threat of Hamas.” Netanyahu echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that the situation could resolve “the easy way or the hard way.” Notably, Hamas was absent from the latest discussions, raising questions about the legitimacy and potential effectiveness of the proposed framework.
As the world watches closely, the unfolding situation raises critical questions about the future of peace in the region and whether any plan can genuinely pave the way for long-term stability and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.
