Explained | Why Trump’s Gaza plan is just a ceasefire, not a true peace deal
Trump's 20-point Gaza "peace plan" is widely criticised as a colonial ceasefire, not true peace, due to its lack of Palestinian statehood and agency.
New Delhi: United States President Donald Trump’s recently unveiled 20-point Gaza "peace plan," while offering some seemingly constructive proposals on hostages, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction, is being widely dismissed by political experts as merely a temporary ceasefire rather than a genuine path to lasting peace by considering Israel's past ceasefire violations.
The core criticism revolves around its unmistakable colonial framework. The plan envisions Gaza being overseen by Trump himself, with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other external figures cast as trustees for Palestinian governance, while the fundamental aspiration of Palestinian statehood is indefinitely deferred. This top-down approach, with minimal Palestinian agency and a glaring omission of a sovereign state, signals a halt in conflict, not a comprehensive resolution.
This logic, critics argue, is far from new; it echoes a century-long Anglo-American approach to Palestine. From the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, which granted the UK the Mandate over Palestine, to successive US interventions, both direct and indirect, since 1945, external powers have consistently dictated the region's future. The current 20-point formula proposed by Trump is widely perceived by political observers as a one-sided initiative designed to heavily favour Israel, leaving virtually no room for Palestinians to articulate or advance their own demands. Crucially, the plan entirely omits any mention of an independent Palestinian state, the central issue for which Palestinians have been fighting for decades.
A truly decolonised peace plan, experts suggest, must dismantle this historical scaffolding and restore genuine Palestinian sovereignty. Such a plan would prioritise addressing the central issue of Palestinian statehood, empowering the Palestinian Authority (PA) from the outset to hold governance, ensuring that economic planning rests exclusively in Palestinian hands, and unequivocally rejecting any external "viceroys."
Furthermore, it would establish a clear and short timeline for complete Israeli withdrawal and the full achievement of Palestinian sovereignty, ideally by the beginning of 2026.
From the Balfour Declaration to Versailles, to Oslo, and now to Trump’s "Board of Peace," Palestinians have consistently been treated as subjects rather than sovereign actors.
Observers also recall the US President's previous engagement in the region. After taking credit for past agreements, he appeared to lose interest, and his administration subsequently allowed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reject or alter new ceasefire proposals, even after Hamas had accepted them. The key differences now are that this current deal aims to leave no hostages in Gaza and that Trump has, belatedly, demonstrated a willingness to exert significant pressure on Netanyahu.
A lingering question remains: Is this ceasefire plan, rather than a genuine peace plan, being hastily assembled to secure Trump a Nobel Peace Prize? Hamas, by trusting Trump to uphold the peace, is taking a major gamble, particularly if he does not receive the Nobel Prize and his interest wanes once more. The US President missed his first chase for the Nobel Peace Prize after the committee announced Venezuelan opposition leader and activist, María Corina Machado, as the winner of the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize 2025. Responding immediately after the announcement, Whitehouse issued a statement stating that the US President will continue to pursue "peace deals".
Examining how past agreements have failed
May 2023: Egyptian negotiators brokered a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a militant group in Gaza smaller than Hamas. This agreement ended five days of violence that claimed 35 lives. While brief rocket fire rattled nerves the following day, the agreement largely appeared to hold.
May-June 2021: An 11-day war, marking the worst flare-up of violence in Gaza since 2014, resulted in 230 Gazan killings before an eventual ceasefire agreement.
The 51-Day Summer War of 2014: One of the most protracted and devastating clashes occurred in July and August 2014 when Israel bombarded Gaza after three Israelis were abducted in the West Bank. Egypt proposed a ceasefire, which Israel accepted. However, Hamas rejected the terms, asserting that none of its core demands had been addressed, leading to an immediate resumption of rocket volleys from Gaza and intensive Israeli airstrikes.
Despite another Egyptian ceasefire announcement just two days later, Israel escalated its response, deploying tanks and ground troops into Gaza and initiating fire from the sea. Over the gruelling 51 days that followed, a staggering nine truces were proposed and subsequently broke down. By the time the conflict finally concluded, it had claimed the lives of more than 2,000 Palestinians and 70 Israelis, underscoring the profound human cost of the failed diplomatic efforts.
November 2012: In November 2012, eight days of bloody conflict between Israel and Hamas came to an end with a ceasefire orchestrated by the joint efforts of the United States and Egypt. The agreement, captured in a one-page memorandum of understanding, was largely superficial, leaving many of the underlying issues that had sparked the violence unresolved and open for further negotiation.
The fragility of the truce was immediately apparent. Israel was accused of violating the ceasefire by firing on fishermen and farmers who approached newly relaxed security perimeters. However, in a significant gesture, Israel also permitted building materials to enter Gaza for the first time in several years.
January 2009: Israel's unilateral truce after a 22-day war. The winter of 2009 saw a 22-day war waged by Israel against Hamas, which ended with Israel's unilateral declaration of a ceasefire, stating it had achieved its military objectives. Hamas and other armed Palestinian factions soon followed suit with their own ceasefire declarations.
Yet, this fragile peace was quickly strained. Barely two weeks later, militants launched rockets and shells into southern Israel. In response, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert issued a stark warning, threatening "disproportionate" retaliation.
June 2008: The earliest of these major conflicts reviewed dates back to June 2008, when Egypt successfully brokered a six-month truce between Hamas and Israel. This agreement brought a temporary end to a period marked by intense rocket fire from Gaza, countered by Israeli airstrikes and raids.
The truce faced an immediate test, with rocket attacks occurring just five days after the agreement was signed, threatening to derail it entirely. Despite this early challenge, the peace largely held for five months. However, by November of that year, the ceasefire had entirely unravelled, with each side levelling accusations against the other for failing to uphold the agreed-upon terms, setting the stage for the renewed conflicts that would follow.
For over a decade, the relationship between Israel and various Palestinian armed groups, primarily Hamas, has been characterised by a volatile cycle of intense conflict, brief, often-violated ceasefires, and ultimately, a return to hostilities. Despite numerous attempts at de-escalation brokered by international players like Egypt and the United States, lasting peace has remained elusive, leaving a trail of devastation and unresolved grievances. A review of major confrontations reveals a recurring pattern of triggers, rapid escalation, and agreements that frequently unravel under renewed pressure.