What Trump Does—and Doesn't—Get Credit for in Gaza

It isn’t easy to praise someone who habitually, preemptively, and lavishly praises himself. But there is no gainsaying the fact that President Donald Trump—and President Donald Trump alone—deserves credit for the scenes of joy and relief we’ve seen in Israel and Gaza, respectively, over the past four days.  Had it been left to the druthers of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the leadership of Hamas, there is every likelihood that the devastation of Gaza would have continued into a third year. It is also certain that more of the Israeli hostages would have died in their miserable confinement, whether murdered by their terrorist captors or accidentally killed by the munitions of their own country. Instead, the guns in Gaza have quieted. And it isn’t because of the nudgings of real estate developers Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the promptings of Qatar and Egypt, the pleadings of Europe, the finger-wagging of human-rights organizations, or the hand-wringing of the United Nations alone.  The ceasefire is the gift of Donald Trump. A delayed gift Now for the caveats. As gifts go, this one comes much belated—and with a high risk of disintegrating even as it is being unwrapped. Trump could have brought us to this place much sooner if he had been quicker to apply the pressure that finally forced Netanyahu to accept the peace deal. If the president had not wasted time floating perverse ideas about real-estate opportunities in Gaza, thousands of Palestinian lives might have been saved, and more of the Israeli hostages would be in the bosom of their families. (These numbers would have been higher still if President Joe Biden had not restricted himself to pious posturing.) What finally snapped Trump into action was Netanyahu’s decision to bomb Qatar in a failed attempt to eliminate Hamas’s exiled political leadership in Doha. This was an attack on a key U.S. ally, one that hosts 10,000 American troops at a strategic air base and has committed to hundreds of billions of dollars in investments in the U.S.—and moreover, one that has promised Trump an upgraded Air Force One.  Trump’s current peace deal is mercifully free of any references to a “Gaza Riviera.” It does not require Palestinians to leave the enclave. Now that the hostages have been released and Israel has agreed to free nearly 2.000 Palestinians, Gazans can receive life-saving aid. The long road ahead So far, so good. But Trump’s 20-point plan is too vague on crucial details of what comes next. The nature, composition, and responsibilities of the international stabilization force mentioned in the plan has not been fleshed out. While 200 U.S. soldiers and officers will monitor the ceasefire as part of an international task force, they won’t be on the ground in Gaza. Nor yet have Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, and the U.A.E. committed their contingents. The plan foresees the gradual development and deployment of a freshly trained police and security force, but building up such a force takes months or years. Who will provide security in the meantime?  The governance arrangements are equally murky. Trump’s proposal calls for a “technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee” to run day-to-day affairs in Gaza, overseen by a “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump himself and including former British Prime Minister Tony Blair—a controversial choice already rejected by Hamas. But it’s unclear who will select this committee, what authority it will have, or how it will function if Hamas remains a force in Gaza.  There are no clear penalties defined for any side breaching the peace. Given the previous behavior of Netanyahu and the Hamas leadership, there is every chance that violence might erupt again. Israel broke the previous ceasefire in March.  There are already reports Hamas is reasserting control over Gaza, battling rival factions to consolidate power. Basim Naim, the Hamas leader, has said they won’t lay down their arms until a comprehensive agreement is reached. If Hamas doesn’t disarm—or Israel resumes its bombings of Gaza—the entire peace plan risks unraveling. The absence of monitoring and enforcement mechanisms contributed to the failure of the 1993 Oslo Accords to deliver comprehensive peace. Trump has provided personal guarantees he wouldn’t let Israel abandon the deal and resume the war—a key factor in convincing Hamas to accept the peace plan—but what happens if Trump loses interest or becomes distracted by other crises? Trump’s plan offers no answer. Nor is it clear who will rebuild Gaza, and who will pay for it. The White House has clarified that the U.S. will not pay for reconstruction. Egypt’s $53 billion reconstruction plan lacks specific details on funding sources. The Saudis and other Arab countries will be reluctant to contribute to a rebuilding effort absent an Israeli commitment to recognize a Palestinian state. Trump’s plan mentions only vague language about a “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination” and “statehood”—far weaker than the explicit two-state solution demanded by Arab nations.  In the absence of all these things, the deal depends almost entirely on Trump maintaining pressure on the principals. In turn, this requires him to remain closely engaged, week after week and month after month, with a broad spectrum of actors—not just individual power brokers. Focus, stamina, and coalition-building are not the president’s strongest suits. Trump thrives on dramatic breakthroughs, headline-grabbing announcements, and one-on-one negotiations. But the patient, grinding work of peace implementation typically bores him. He will need to conjure up previously unseen qualities of concentration and stamina to see this fragile peace through to something more durable. So, for now, let’s hear one cheer for Donald Trump. And let’s hope he earns three.