American President Donald Trump presented a 20-point peace plan at the White House this Monday, September 29, 2025, aimed at ending nearly two years of conflict in Gaza. Alongside him, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed cautious support, conditioning the agreement's application on the attitude of Hamas, which he accuses of being solely responsible for the continuation of hostilities.
This initiative, which combines promises of a ceasefire, hostage release, and the creation of a transitional authority in Gaza, comes amid international weariness with a conflict that has already claimed over 66,000 lives on the Palestinian side, mostly civilians according to figures from Gaza's Ministry of Health, validated by the UN, and 1,219 lives on the Israeli side, mostly civilians, since the October 7, 2023 attack that Benjamin Netanyahu strives to remind us of.
The document released by the White House contains five main points, providing for:
- An immediate ceasefire and a gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces.
- The release of Israeli hostages within 72 hours of Tel Aviv's approval, in exchange for Israel's release of over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, including several hundred sentenced to life imprisonment.
- The creation of a temporary “technocratic and apolitical” authority, excluding Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, to administer the territory.
- The deployment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) under American and Arab supervision.
- Amnesty for Hamas members who lay down their arms or choose exile.
In a notable concession compared to his past statements, Donald Trump assured that “no one will be forced to leave Gaza,” thus moving away from his earlier remarks suggesting a possible evacuation of the Palestinian population. He promised to “provide an opportunity to build a better Gaza.”
Benjamin Netanyahu, criticized by many experts and human rights activists, welcomed an initiative that, according to him, “allows for the achievement of war objectives,” namely the demilitarization of Gaza, the disarmament of Hamas, and the return of hostages. But the head of the Israeli government immediately set red lines:
“If Hamas rejects your plan, Mr. President, or if they say they accept it but block it, Israel will finish the job,” he warned, clearly implying that the 'genocide' will only just begin.
The Prime Minister also ruled out any role for the Palestinian Authority in Gaza “without radical transformation,” reaffirming his constant opposition to the creation of a Palestinian state, contrary to the wishes of many Gazans.
True to his self-centered discourse and flamboyant style, Donald Trump, President of the United States, described this Monday as “perhaps one of the most beautiful days of civilization,” hoping for a “positive” response from Hamas while promising “total” support for Israel in case of rejection, despite the strong desire of the rest of the world to distance itself from Israel in the execution of its macabre plan for the extermination of Gazans.
“In a few days, there should be no more firing in Gaza… Perhaps for eternity. Wouldn't that be nice?” he launched, multiplying superlatives.
The American president, in the midst of an election campaign, also sought to flatter his Israeli ally: “Netanyahu is a warrior… Israel is lucky to have him.”
These statements, punctuated by biblical references from Netanyahu (“those who bless you will be blessed”), aim to appeal to both the American evangelical electorate, committed to the Israeli cause, and an Israeli public weary of a costly war.
While the American plan has been hailed as “historic” by the Forum of Israeli Hostage Families, its implementation remains uncertain. Hamas, the only interlocutor still capable of negotiating the release of captives, has not yet officially responded.
Several analysts note that the exclusion of the Palestinian Authority and the direct supervision of American President Donald Trump, a staunch ally of Israel, could complicate the adherence of moderate Arab countries, while reinforcing the image of a process imposed by Washington.
Furthermore, the idea of an international force in Gaza raises many questions: Which countries will participate? What will be its legitimacy? And how can its mission avoid being perceived as a new occupation?
Beyond the announcements, the American plan de facto endorses a balance of power largely favorable to Israel. It provides neither for the recognition of Palestinian self-determination nor guarantees for a future Palestinian state.
By insisting on the temporary maintenance of an Israeli military presence in Gaza, it validates the idea of security dictated by Tel Aviv. This logic risks fueling resentment in the Arab world and weakening moderate Palestinian voices, already fragile due to years of blockade and internal divisions.
For Donald Trump, this plan also appears as a domestic political operation. By positioning himself as a “peacemaker” while promising unlimited support to Israel, he seeks to simultaneously appeal to the evangelical, pro-Israeli electorate and voters weary of endless wars in the Middle East. The emphasis on hostage release, a strong emotional theme, is part of this strategy: to give the impression of a president capable of rapid results, even at the cost of a shaky agreement.
For Hamas, the alternative is delicate: accept a plan that excludes it from Gaza's political future, or refuse and risk an even more devastating military offensive. Acceptance could be perceived as a surrender, but refusal would offer Israel and Washington the pretext for a justified escalation in the name of security. This encircled position, where every choice carries an enormous cost, illustrates the impasse in which the Islamist movement finds itself after two years of war.
Finally, critics point out that this proposal, despite its promises of a ceasefire, carefully avoids the central question: the occupation and status of the Palestinian territories. By focusing on demilitarization and amnesty, but without a clear political perspective, Washington and Tel Aviv are betting on a “Peace of Management” rather than a Peace of Justice. However, recent history from Camp David to Oslo shows that agreements that do not address root causes only postpone the inevitable return of violence.
The Trump-Netanyahu plan appears to be the most detailed proposal since the outbreak of the conflict, but it rests on a fragile equation: convincing Hamas to concede without major political compensation, while satisfying an Israel that rejects the idea of a Palestinian state.
Immediately, the families of Palestinian and Israeli hostages await concrete actions. For now, the hope of a ceasefire rests on a simple but explosive question: Will Hamas agree to negotiate with a Donald Trump who promises Israel his “total support” in case of failure?
