Gaza Herald- Over the coming days, Hamas will examine Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza, a proposal already embraced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. At its core, the plan demands the disarmament of Palestinian resistance and effectively strips Gaza of Palestinian sovereignty.
While it includes elements likely to resonate with parts of Palestinian society, such as the release of 250 prisoners serving life terms and 1,700 detainees from Gaza, including women and children held since October 2023, the broader design ensures Israel’s grip remains unchallenged. Observers argue the deal acknowledges Israel’s deliberate use of Palestinians as bargaining chips while offering Israel no penalties for violating terms.
Former US State Department official Annelle Sheline noted that the plan mirrors the failures of the 1993 Oslo Accords. “There are no penalties for Israel if it fails to adhere to the terms. Therefore, Israel has no incentive to comply, a standard feature of American proposals,” she said.
Aid is promised, but it is provided under international oversight through the UN, the Red Crescent, and other neutral agencies. The wording itself concedes that Israel previously obstructed humanitarian aid and funneled it through biased channels, yet still leaves Israel leeway through vague timelines. An “International Stabilization Force” would be stationed in Gaza. At the same time, Israeli withdrawal is tied to undefined “standards and milestones” agreed upon by Israel, the US, and guarantors, an open-ended formula that analysts warn will allow Israel to stall indefinitely.
Daniel Levy, a British-Israeli analyst and former negotiator, described the plan as deliberately empty of detail. “It allows Israel to blame the other side when either a deal is not reached or when Netanyahu decides to desist from implementing and resumes the genocide assault,” he said.
Unlike the January ceasefire deal that compelled Israel to retreat to a perimeter buffer, Trump’s plan explicitly allows Israel to maintain control of major cities, Rafah, Khan Younis, Jabalia, and Beit Hanoun.
Displacement by Design
One of the most contentious aspects is the question of forced displacement. While the plan states “no one will be forced to leave Gaza,” and offers assurances of safe return, Palestinian analysts remain skeptical. Abed Abou Shhadeh, a political analyst from Jaffa, said Israel has invested heavily in a “voluntary departure” policy. “People in the West underestimate the seriousness of Israelis with their plan to expel Palestinians,” he warned, noting that destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure would render the enclave unlivable, pushing Palestinians to leave under “humanitarian” pretenses.
Qossay Hamed, a Hamas expert in Ramallah, added: “The plan doesn’t include explicit displacement, but the inhuman conditions will force people to leave. Israelis and Americans know Gaza is no longer suitable for human living.”
Governance as Corporate Control
Trump’s plan proposes that Gaza be run by an international “Board of Peace,” chaired by Trump himself with Tony Blair as deputy. Reports indicate the board would be dominated by billionaires and business figures, with vetted Palestinian administrators relegated to secondary roles.
“This reads more like a charter for a reborn Dutch East India Company than a 21st-century political plan,” Levy said. Critics argue the language of “boards,” “chairmen,” and “CEOs” transforms Gaza’s future into a corporate enterprise rather than a path toward sovereignty.
Abou Shhadeh stressed the danger of this model: “For Blair, everything is about GDP and economics. It’s as if Palestinian history, livelihood, and narrative don’t exist. They don’t want a political entity; they want corporations.”
Sheline drew parallels to Iraq’s Coalition Provisional Authority, widely rejected as a puppet government. She warned that “foreign occupation will always provoke resistance” and said the conditions of Trump’s plan, which provide no justice for decades of abuse or the genocide of the past two years, make it “a complete fantasy to imagine that resistance will cease in Gaza.”
A Future Without Statehood
The plan suggests interfaith dialogue and “changing mindsets,” but remains silent on binding steps toward a Palestinian state. Netanyahu, who openly opposes Palestinian statehood, has repeatedly vowed to block such an outcome.
Sheline underlined that there is no reciprocal demand for Israeli “deradicalization,” despite the government’s genocidal policies enjoying broad public support. “There has been little to no discussion of the need to deradicalize Israeli society, the majority of which remains in favor of mass murder and starvation inflicted upon Palestinians in Gaza,” she said.
Trump’s proposal, cloaked in the language of humanitarian aid and economic development, is, in the eyes of many Palestinians and analysts, an occupation by other means. With no enforcement mechanisms on Israel, vague withdrawal terms, and a governance model resembling corporate colonization, the plan does little to end Gaza’s suffering. Instead, it risks entrenching Israeli control while forcing Palestinians to survive in unlivable conditions, which many see not as peace, but as the continuation of genocide under a different name.
