The course ahead for Trump’s Gaza ceasefire plan

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 -International relation.

Introduction

Donald Trump’s 20-point plan sets a ceasefire path for Gaza. It calls for an immediate stop to fighting and the return of all Israeli hostages. Hamas would disarm and its military sites be dismantled. An international stabilization force would deploy. Gaza would shift to a temporary technocratic administration under outside oversight. The plan backs large-scale aid and reconstruction and proposes a conditional path to Palestinian statehood. Both Israel and Hamas have concerns, and the plan still has issues that need to be resolved. The course ahead for Trump’s Gaza ceasefire plan.

Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan

1. Immediate ceasefire and freezes: Fighting stops at once. Existing battle lines are frozen until conditions are set for a staged Israeli withdrawal. Full aid flows immediately once both sides assent.
2. Hostage released: Within 72 hours, 20 living Israeli hostages are released, in exchange for hundreds of detained Gazans.
3. Humanitarian surge: Full aid flows start immediately once both sides agree. Relief covers food, health, water, power, and basic services. Aid distribution will be overseen by the UN, the Red Crescent, and international agencies, ensuring transparent and interference-free relief.
4. Reconstruction: The plan includes economic reconstruction and rehabilitation of Gaza’s infrastructure. The emphasis is on restoring essential services and rebuilding damaged systems to support daily life and recovery.

5. Disarmament and amnesty: The plan requires Hamas to disarm and mandates the destruction of tunnels and weapons-production sites. Militants who lay down arms receive amnesty. Those who refuse are offered safe passage outside Gaza. The aim is to end militia control and reduce future security risks.
6. Governance and oversight

• Gaza will be run temporarily by a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee. Oversight rests with an international “Board of Peace,” chaired by Donald Trump, with Tony Blair proposed as a member.
• A multinational stabilisation force will support policing, border management, and the movement of humanitarian aid.
• These steps are designed to separate governance from armed factions and reassure all parties during the transition.

Concern raised by Israel

1. Israel prioritises permanent security over speed. Leaders argue that Gaza must not retain any residual militant capability, and they are wary of steps that could limit freedom of action before they are fully confident that threats will not return.
2. Key ministers demand Hamas’s total defeat, not just disarmament. They view amnesty or safe passage for militants as unacceptable because it may leave networks or ideology intact and could allow regrouping later.
3. A Palestinian Authority (PA) return to govern Gaza faces resistance. The current leadership has repeatedly rejected handing Gaza to the PA, which makes proposals that envision PA control difficult to accept domestically.
4. Any pathway to Palestinian self-determination is contested. Israel’s current leaders oppose moves that look like steps toward a Palestinian state. Even soft wording about a “future political path” gets strong resistance. So the government finds it hard to accept any language that could be read as moving toward statehood.

Concern raised by Palestinians and Hamas

1. Hamas sees the terms as one-sided: They are asked to release all hostages and disarm at once, which would leave them defenceless while Israel keeps decisive leverage, creating high risks if trust breaks down.
2. Hamas objects to being excluded from shaping the terms: They argue that decisions on Gaza’s governance should come from a broader Palestinian consensus in which they participate, rather than being set externally.
3. Confidence in exchanges is low: Releases are welcome, but Palestinians note Israel’s revolving-door arrests; at least 18,000 Palestinians have been arrested in the West Bank since October 7, 2023. This undermines confidence that releases will change realities.
4. Ceasefire meaning: The plan allows fighting to continue even after implementation starts, and Hamas rejects this. They say this undermines the idea of a ceasefire and weakens incentives for withdrawal and de-escalation.

Issue with this plan

1. Timelines and order are not defined: Only the 72-hour hostage step is fixed, while the ceasefire, IDF withdrawal, and demilitarisation have no clear sequence or dates, so the framework reads like intentions rather than a workable roadmap.
2. There is no independent oversight body: The plan does not create a neutral mechanism to verify steps, settle disputes, or certify progress, which makes breakdowns and blame more likely.
3. The stabilisation force is undefined: The contributors, mandate, rules of engagement, and coordination methods (deconfliction, border security, police vetting) are not specified, which raises serious feasibility and safety questions.
4. The West Bank is omitted and the legal anchor is weak. Daily flashpoints and settlement expansion are ignored, and the plan does not ground itself in international law, UN Security Council resolutions, or ICJ’s 1967-borders guidance..
5. No provision for representative: The plan installs a technocratic committee and an external oversight board but offers no clear path to elections, institutional reform milestones, or a monitoring system for those reforms.
6. External backing is uncertain. Gulf countries have kept involvement limited and are focused on the Abraham Accords, Iran-related security, ties with the U.S., and a cautious Syria thaw. The plan does not show what they will contribute or how they would restrain Israel if the ceasefire strains, so enforcement and funding remain in doubt.
7. Reconstruction lacks a political horizon: The “Riviera”-style redevelopment and “miracle cities” pitch resurfaces. It promises opportunity but without addressing political sovereignty, risking a disconnect between economic plans and lived realities.

Conclusion

The plan offers quick relief, but key parts are unclear. There is no fixed order or dates, no neutral monitor, and no path to elections or a West Bank track. Gulf support is uncertain. Israel resists any language that points to statehood. Hamas rejects combat during rollout and fears one-sided terms. For the ceasefire to hold, it needs firm timelines, verified milestones, clear ISF roles, and a credible path to representative Palestinian governance.

Question for practice:

Examine the main concerns with Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan and how they weaken the chances of a lasting ceasefire.

Source: The Hindu