NEW DELHI: After months of diplomatic deadlock, rising civilian casualties, and failed initiatives, US President Donald Trump surprised the world this week by announcing that Israel and Hamas had agreed to the first phase of a Washington-brokered peace plan for Gaza.
The deal, finalised with help from mediators in Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, and the UAE, triggered an immediate ceasefire and set in motion the framework for the release of hostages held by Hamas. It is the most significant diplomatic breakthrough in the conflict since the war began nearly two years ago.
Trump’s statement, released on his Truth Social platform, was characteristically exuberant: “This is a GREAT Day for the Arab and Muslim World, Israel, all surrounding Nations, and the United States of America.” He added, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” while thanking regional partners who played a key role in bringing the deal together.
Yet, behind the triumphalism lies a reality that is far more complex. While this deal is the most structured and potentially enforceable framework yet, many of its most important terms remain either vaguely defined or entirely unresolved. That means the breakthrough, while historic, remains precarious.
The Israeli cabinet approved the deal early Friday, allowing the ceasefire to come into immediate effect. The agreement calls for Israeli forces to begin a partial withdrawal from Gaza, expected to take less than 24 hours. There is a brief window, 24 hours, for legal objections to be filed in Israel’s High Court. Once that expires, Hamas will have 72 hours to release the hostages. Else the deal will collapse.
The United States is deploying 200 troops, not into Gaza, but in the surrounding region to help oversee implementation in coordination with observers from Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, and the UAE. The oversight will fall under US Central Command, with Adm. Brad Cooper tasked with ensuring the ceasefire is respected by both sides.
This deal stands out from previous ceasefires in both structure and political momentum. It is a product of not only regional diplomacy but also forceful Trump leverage. Earlier this year, a similar three-phase plan collapsed under competing interests and political pressure. Since then, the humanitarian situation in Gaza has deteriorated to catastrophic levels, with widespread famine, displacement, and near-total infrastructure collapse. At the same time, Hamas has increasingly relied on hostages as its last major bargaining chip, while the Israeli government faces mounting domestic pressure to bring its citizens home.
There is a clear difference. Unlike previous efforts, this agreement was built around a simple but effective trade-off: a full hostage release in exchange for a ceasefire and phased Israeli withdrawal, with clear external oversight. It also outlines Hamas’ demilitarisation and the establishment of a transitional governance structure for Gaza as prerequisites for long-term peace. Though light on specifics, the Trump plan sketches a tentative roadmap toward Gaza’s reconstruction and the distant prospect of a Palestinian state. But its fragility is evident, politically, militarily, and diplomatically.
At the press conference announcing the deal, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood at a separate lectern, silent as Trump laid out the details after recasting Trump’s plan through the lens of Israel’s own strategic priorities.
On the other side, Hamas, by contrast, walks away with little more than a ceasefire and the burden of survival after a war it initiated with the October 7, 2023, attack is notably absent from the deal’s terms.
The plan misses enforceable timelines, clear mechanisms for implementing the promised international stabilisation force. Netanyahu has enough room within the plan’s ambiguity to stall or reshape its trajectory while maintaining the appearance of being in agreement with Trump’s plan.
Conveniently for Netanyahu, Trump has said that if Hamas declines or pushes back, Israel will be free to “finish the job.” That is like Netanyahu getting a political cover to frame any Hamas response as a refusal and resume operations with a US green light.
