If US President Donald Trump hopes to earn a Nobel Peace Prize, he’s going to need to do better than his 20-point “Comprehensive Plan to End Gaza’s Conflict.”
Characteristically exaggerating, he called the plan’s release “one of the greatest days in human history”, but poring over Arab, Israeli and US media reveals that most analysts are not inclined to see it that way.
The reasons behind the wide-ranging interpretations about the plan’s intentions are many: the Arabs’ well-earned lack of trust in Trump and Netanyahu; hardline ideological Israelis’ belief that Netanyahu will do whatever it takes to remain prime minister; the deliberate vagueness of the plan’s key points; and, especially galling for Palestinians, that the plan was presented as a fait accompli without their input.
Of these factors, it’s the vagueness that’s problematic for all sides.
Israeli hardliners fret over the mention of an Israeli withdrawal, the presence of Arab peacekeepers, Palestinian police, and the possible return of the PA (which, in their minds, means a link between the West Bank and Gaza leading to a Palestinian state).
Palestinians, on the other hand, reading the document closely, see that there are no guarantees for these provisions.
While a phased Israeli withdrawal is mentioned, the plan has Israeli forces remaining in a security perimeter inside Gaza, continuing Israel’s two-decades-long stranglehold over entry to and egress from Gaza.
They see this plan as too focused on Israeli security, with little regard for justice and Palestinian security.
Another glaring problem is the lack of definition of terms and any enforcement mechanism to ensure implementation.
What is the “technocratic apolitical Palestinian committee” that is to be created to run day-to-day operations in Gaza?
Will its members be vetted by the Trump-led board?
Will the Israelis be able to veto members?
Without clarity on these points, will this committee be viewed as legitimate by Palestinians?
Without a defined neutral mechanism for enforcement, will the US allow Israel to act in Gaza as they have with regard to the ceasefires in Lebanon and Syria – where they act as the sole arbiter and enforcer of the agreements? (Their interpretation of ceasefire is apparently “you cease, while we continue to fire.”)
Some detail is provided with regard to Hamas members’ decommissioning their weapons, pledging to commit to peaceful coexistence, and forming an International Stabilisation Force in Gaza.
But what’s unclear is how this will be administered.
While our polls show that Palestinians in Gaza have had enough of this war and Hamas, they also express the desire to be governed by a national unity coalition of Palestinians and want accountability for the crimes committed by the Israeli forces.
The bottom line is that far from being “one of the great days in human history”, the Trump plan is just a start.
It may end the bombing and return those held captive, but to lead to peace, much more discussion must add flesh to the plan’s bones.
That will require openness and trust on all sides. The following are essential.
First, Hamas should accept the plan, even while stating their concerns and objections. Continuing the conflict is (and has long been) a dead end.
Hamas cannot and should not be the arbiter of the Palestinian future.
Too many lives have been lost and many more shattered.
The fighting must end.
Second, Arabs and other nations must insist that Israelis be held accountable for their crimes.
They can’t be brushed aside.
Third, with a ceasefire, the massive influx of aid and support Palestinians require should commence.
Fourth, working from the plan’s outline, negotiations should begin, with serious Palestinian input, to flesh out the details for resolving unanswered questions.
Fifth, if Trump wants to earn his place in history, he must be willing to crack the whip requiring Israel to adhere to whatever terms are established.
And for this to be prize-worthy, the whip-cracking must also apply to the West Bank and East Jerusalem – and not only with regard to annexation.
The Trump plan, with its focus on Israel’s security and vague assurances to Palestinians, succeeded in getting Netanyahu and Hamas on board, each side with their own reservations.
If it is to lead to peace, hard work is ahead.
&uuid=(email))