Afrasianet - Dr. Hisham Okal - Professor of Crisis Management and International Relations - I attended the press conference between Trump and Netanyahu, or rather, I watched a lousy theatrical performance titled: "The Peace Plan." Trump talks about Gaza as if it were a piece of land at auction and Netanyahu smiles the smile of someone who knows that the American guest is served to him on a silver platter that Israel's previous governments were unable to take away.

The plan, which President Trump drafted and presented as a "comprehensive solution" to the Gaza conflict, appears at first glance coherent in terms of sequence and mechanisms: a ceasefire, a hostage-prisoner exchange, the reconstruction of an international stabilization force, disarmament, and then a new economic horizon. But on closer inspection, it appears to be more of a security crisis management document than a political settlement project.

First: Strengths

Clear procedural nature: The plan is detailed and sets timetables (72 hours for the release of hostages, stages of withdrawal, IDF withdrawal, mechanism for aid to enter). This gives it a practical character that can be implemented on the ground.

Humanitarian inclusion: immediate assistance, infrastructure reconstruction, support for hospitals and bakeries, and the release of Palestinian prisoners are all steps that give the impression of seriousness towards the suffering of civilians.

Openness to an international umbrella: Talk of a Trump-led "peace council" with international figures (Tony Blair) and an international stabilization force gives the plan a form of multilateralism even if the actual leadership remains American.

Economic Offer: The idea of a special economic zone and development plan reflects Trump's style of presenting "peace through prosperity," a rhetoric that appeals to some international groups.

Second: Fundamental Weaknesses and Gaps

The scandalous absence of the Palestinian side:

The Palestinians were not consulted as a primary party, neither Hamas, the PA nor the factions.

The plan treats Gaza as an administrative arena to be reconstituted from the outside, not as part of a Palestinian national project.

Ignoring the Palestinian State Project:

There is no clear talk of a Palestinian state or the right to self-determination except in Article 19, conditionally and broadly ("Circumstances may exist...").

This means that the national issue is reduced to improving services and security without a real political horizon.

The Marginalization of the Palestinian National Authority:

There was no mention of any role of the PA in the administration of Gaza during the transitional period, but rather of a "technocratic committee under international supervision."

This weakens the legitimacy of any subsequent operation and deepens the Palestinian divide between Gaza and the West Bank.

Separation of the West Bank from Gaza:

The plan never addressed the re-geographically and politically reconnection between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

It is as if Gaza is managed as an independent entity, which serves the Israeli vision by separating the two tracks and blocking the way to the establishment of an integrated Palestinian state.

Fully securing the solution:

The center of gravity in the plan is security: disarmament, international observers, a force to stabilize safe passages.

Issues of sovereignty and national rights are left absent, as if the Palestinians are just a "population" in need of security control and services.

Personalization of the process:

Trump's own presence as president of the Peace Council reflects more of a showmanship than a political guarantee.

The introduction of Tony Blair, known for his role in previous reconstruction projects that have not made tangible progress, raises questions about seriousness. As for the talk about the exchange of prisoners, it is a matter of collecting what is happening to satisfy the Israeli street, but the Palestinian side is powerless, and it is a matter of moderation for the State of Qatar by Netanyahu? 

Lack of legal and political guarantees:

There is no binding international legal framework (such as Security Council resolutions) that guarantees implementation.

Israel is given clear roles while its commitments are conditional and interpretable.

Third: Conclusion

The plan is not a "peace" in the political sense, but a conditional truce aimed at:

Disarming Hamas and removing it from the political scene.

The reconstruction of Gaza with international funding is part of what can be an Arab transitional governance managed from abroad.

Securing the borders of Israel and Egypt.

What Trump is doing is a psychological and moral war in which the Israelis and many Arab media outlets are engaged in to frustrate the people of Gaza once and for all, that there is an opportunity, but this opportunity is unrealistic, to say that Netanyahu has agreed to Trump's proposal and the ball is now in the court of the Palestinians and the Arabs.

There are no details in Trump's plan, which is only a rescue for Netanyahu, a discharge of the anger of the people, and a distraction from efforts to recognize Palestine. Hence, it can be said that the plan represents the management of a short-to-medium-term crisis, not a strategic solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.