By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Trump, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, proposed a 20-point plan to end the war in Gaza and release hostages, a plan with conditions previously rejected by Hamas. The plan involves a temporary governing committee, hostage release within 72 hours of Hamas’s acceptance, and potential amnesty for Hamas members who disarm. While Trump expressed optimism, the plan faces challenges, including Hamas’s refusal to disarm and the lack of explicit mention of Palestinian statehood. Simultaneously, Netanyahu apologized to Qatar for a recent strike on Hamas officials, seeking to mend relations with a key mediator.
Read the original article here
Trump and Netanyahu say they’ve agreed to a plan to end Gaza war and await Hamas to accept terms, and the world collectively seems to be holding its breath, or perhaps, more accurately, bracing for impact. News reports from Monday announced that these two figures, President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had apparently come to an agreement on a plan to bring an end to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The catch? It’s now up to Hamas to decide whether or not they’ll accept the terms.
The core of the plan, at least according to the information released, involves a multi-pronged approach. Trump’s vision, it seems, centers on a 20-point strategy designed to not only end the fighting but also to shape the future of Gaza’s governance. A key element is the establishment of a temporary governing board, to be headed, unsurprisingly, by Trump himself, with the inclusion of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The plan also calls for an immediate ceasefire, contingent on both sides accepting the deal.
Perhaps the most dramatic aspect of the proposal involves the release of hostages. The plan specifies that if Israel accepts the terms, all remaining hostages should be released within 72 hours. This, of course, is a critical piece of the puzzle. The plan also outlines the release of prisoners by Israel as a part of the agreement.
However, the underlying assumption seems to be that Hamas’s time is running out. The plan, effectively, presents Hamas with a clear choice: accept these terms or face further consequences. The United States, according to Trump, would provide “full backing” to Israel should Hamas reject the proposal, and the consensus on Hamas accepting this ultimatum is quite negative.
The 20-point plan itself is quite comprehensive. It starts with the premise that Gaza will be a “deradicalized terror-free zone.” It calls for Gaza’s redevelopment, to benefit its people, with the immediate cessation of all military actions once the agreement is reached. The plan lays out the specifics of hostage and prisoner release, along with the potential for amnesty for Hamas members who commit to peaceful coexistence and the decommissioning of their weapons. Crucially, the plan also mandates the influx of humanitarian aid and the unobstructed entry of aid via the UN and other international bodies. The Rafah crossing would be opened, and Gaza would be governed by a technocratic Palestinian committee with international oversight, led by the “Board of Peace,” chaired by Donald Trump. An economic development plan, aiming to revitalize Gaza, is also part of the equation.
The implications of this plan, if accepted, are enormous. However, many believe that Hamas will not accept the terms. The feeling is that it’s not a negotiation; it’s an ultimatum. A peace agreement typically involves both parties actually agreeing on the terms, but in this scenario, the plan feels more like demands being laid out for Hamas to accept. This is a sentiment echoed by many who feel that this plan will amount to nothing.
The role of Trump in this is also under scrutiny. Some believe that he will take over Gaza in order to profit from it. The fact that Trump would lead this governance body is seen as a self-serving move. It’s being said he wants the Nobel prize that Obama received.
In essence, this is the situation: a plan has been presented, with the future of Gaza hanging in the balance. The world watches, waiting to see whether Hamas will accept these terms, or if this initiative will be relegated to the list of well-intentioned, but ultimately unsuccessful, attempts to bring peace to a deeply troubled region.