HECTIC diplomacy and decisive intervention by President Donald Trump produced a ceasefire in Gaza after two years of a brutal Israeli military offensive that left over 67,000 Palestinians dead, a humanitarian catastrophe and total devastation. Dramatic developments that culminated in the US president’s visit to the Middle East and the ‘peace summit’ in Sharm el-Sheikh aroused hopes of an ‘era of peace’. But that may be a distant possibility given the fragility of the ceasefire and the stumbling blocks facing the critical next phases of the peace process.

The peace declaration signed by Trump and leaders of Egypt, Qatar and Turkiye at Sharm el-Sheikh contains general principles. It states the commitment to implement the Trump peace agreement but without detailing or elaborating its various elements. The signing ceremony neither had a representative from Hamas nor Israel, the two parties to the ceasefire agreement. The ceasefire, in any case, marks the beginning of a process not its culmination.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proclaimed victory after Hamas released all the Israeli captives in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. But his commitment to honour the ceasefire and implement other steps of Trump’s 20-point plan, especially withdrawal from Gaza, is yet to be tested. His record is not encouraging. The last ceasefire in January was unilaterally ended by Israel after two months when it restarted its military onslaught. Tel Aviv also refused to negotiate further phases of what was earlier agreed.

This time Hamas sought written guarantees that Israel would not resume fighting once hostages were released. But it was unable to secure this. Instead, it got verbal assurances from the Americans. It will need Trump’s sustained engagement and pressure on Netanyahu to keep the peace process on track. Trump has staked his prestige on the Gaza deal, casting it as a “historic dawn of a new Middle East”. But he is not known to involve himself in detail that the plan’s implementation will require in the weeks ahead. Trump’s attention span is famously short.

With a fragile ceasefire in place, the path to peace in Gaza is strewn with formidable obstacles.

The next phase will involve intense negotiations to reach agreement on key aspects of the Trump plan, including demilitarisation of the territory, dismantling Hamas, pullout of Israeli forces from Gaza and deployment of a multinational stabilisation force. These are all vexing issues on which there is a yawning gap between the positions of Hamas and Israel. On Gaza’s post-conflict governance, convergence has yet to be evolved between the Palestinians/ Arab governments and Washington. The US has baulked at addressing the all-important issue of Palestinian statehood, for which Muslim countries want some assurance beyond the vague reference in Trump’s plan to “a pathway” to statehood.

Hamas is expected to disarm under the plan but has given no unequivocal assurance to give up arms as there is no commitment from Israel to withdraw from Gaza. Hamas leaders have indicated that without a comprehensive Israeli withdrawal from the territory they will not lay down their arms. A senior Hamas leader, Mousa Abu Marzouk, has said his organisation would only hand over weapons “if the occupation ends and Palestinians can govern themselves”. Others have said they want an iron-clad assurance about the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Click to see more

Trump’s 20-point plan does not address how to sequence Gaza’s demilitarisation with an Israeli pullout. It does not specify a timetable to achieve these two evidently linked goals. This will have to be negotiated which will not be easy, especially as Netanyahu has not committed to a full withdrawal from Gaza. With Israeli officials already claiming Hamas is tightening control over areas that their forces initially vacated, Netanyahu can indefinitely delay the drawdown. Tel Aviv can even derail the process, citing lack of movement on disbanding Hamas.

There are also many unanswered questions about the ‘temporary stabilisation force’ envisioned for Gaza to secure the Strip. The US has already sent 200 troops to Israel to be deployed as part of the so-called civil-military coordination centre to help the stabilisation force monitor the ceasefire and oversee the peace. The terms and rules of engagement of the international stabilisation force (ISF) are purposely absent in the plan and will need to be thrashed out. Negotiations are said to be underway on this.

Will this force have a UN mandate authorised by a Security Council resolution? Several Arab states have shown preference for that. Western members of the P5 are said to be working on a resolution to establish a stabilisation force but not one that operates under the UN flag. Any expectation for its role to involve counter-insurgency or disarm Hamas would be hard for potential troop-contributing countries to accept. No Muslim/ Arab state would want to be seen as acting against Palestinians on Israel’s behalf or protecting Israel. ISF’s size, composition, who will lead it, precise role and how long it is deployed all have to be figured out in negotiations.

Its deployment has to be closely synchronised with the post-conflict governing arrangement in Gaza. Under the plan, a ‘Board of Peace’ headed by Trump is to supervise the temporary transitional governance by a committee of Palestinian technocrats and international experts who are to be responsible for day-to-day affairs. Again, who will constitute this committee and how legitimate will it be, are questions that still have to be grappled with. This international trusteeship arrangement, until a reformed Palestinian Authority takes over, will basically mean Gaza is run by outsiders for an unspecified period in a colonial-style enterprise. How viable this will be — and acceptable to the Palestinians — is an open question. Authority after all depends on legitimacy.

The challenges ahead are daunting. There are already signs of brewing trouble that can unravel the peace plan. Israel has continued to shell Gaza and kill Palestinians during the tenuous ceasefire and delayed full access for humanitarian aid. Hamas has handed over a list of Israeli violations to mediators. Israel has threatened to resume fighting if Hamas doesn’t comply with the deal. Echoing Israel’s threat, Trump has said he would allow Israel to restart military action if the organisation does not lay down its arms. All this suggests that the path to what Trump envisions as a “new dawn” in the Middle East remains a long and uncertain one.

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2025