Trump’s 21-point plan is not a plan at all, but an amateurish document. It contains desirable visions, but ones that are far beyond reach. One provision states that Gaza will be declared a free-trade zone. Another deals with an economic reconstruction program led by countries that have succeeded in building “miracle cities” such as Riyadh, Doha, Abu Dhabi, and Sharm el-Sheikh, so that they can build such a city in Gaza as well. A third provision even speaks of launching a process intended to influence the public in Gaza and Israel to recognize the benefits of peace. Yes, apparently Israel too needs to go through a process of deradicalization.
And what about the more practical provisions? This is where the document becomes bizarre. It does not define the lines to which Israel is supposed to withdraw at each stage, nor does it provide a timetable. It does not say when the international force that is supposed to be established by the United States and Arab countries will enter Gaza. It does not specify who will send troops or what the force’s powers will be.
Even in the section dealing with Hamas’s disarmament of offensive weaponry, the “plan” does not explain how this will be done, who will oversee it, or who will enter the tunnels. The Palestinian Authority is supposed to gain a foothold in the administration of Gaza — but only after implementing reforms. What reforms? Who will approve them?
This is not merely amateurism; it is charlatanism. This is a pro-Israeli document, with Ron Dermer’s fingerprints all over it, and it is essentially a kind of imitation of the now-defunct “Deal of the Century.” Israel’s “concessions” are merely declarative and will take place at some undefined point in the future, while the benefits Israel receives are immediate. In the Deal of the Century, it was annexation; this time, it is the full release of the hostages. By contrast, the establishment of a Palestinian state, the involvement of the Palestinian Authority, and Israel’s withdrawal will happen sometime, at some point, perhaps someday.
In other words, all the claims about the “heavy pressure” Trump is exerting on Netanyahu to accept the “plan” are nothing but nonsense, apparently intended to create the impression in Arab countries that this is a balanced proposal. The problem is that they saw the truth the moment they read the document.
This article was written before the Trump-Netanyahu meeting. I hope Trump pressures Netanyahu, and succeeds. The problem is that, as a senior Israeli official admitted yesterday, it will take weeks to turn the plan into something tangible.
And then something else highly unusual would have to happen: Hamas would have to agree to surrender all of its assets at the very beginning of the agreement, while the IDF has not yet withdrawn a single inch, based on an American commitment in which Hamas has absolutely no trust. As we may recall, the United States promised Hamas a reward for the release of Edan Alexander and did not deliver. Will Qatar manage to twist Hamas’s arm? I hope so. It has not happened so far.
The most interesting provision in the document concerns the possibility that Hamas rejects the proposal. In that case, Israel is supposed to begin transferring areas that are “free of terror,” in the document’s wording, to the new international force. Will any country be willing to send its troops into Gaza right now? Are there already areas in Gaza that can be defined as “free of terror”?
Brett McGurk, President Biden’s envoy for negotiations over the release of the hostages, described in an interview how the previous deal came together. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s envoy, agreed with him that Biden’s team would continue to lead the process, while Witkoff would focus on pressuring Netanyahu to make concessions on two points. That understanding paved the way for the agreement.
Trump and his people still have considerable power to force agreements on Netanyahu. Unfortunately, without the knowledge, experience, and creativity of a serious administration, it is difficult for them to translate that power into reality on the ground.