No-peace deal: Trump’s Gaza plan may secure a hostage exchange, but it is unlikely to stop the war

Доступно на русском

Hope for the return of the hostages

“We are on the verge of a great accomplishment. It is not final yet — we are working on it with all our strength, and I hope, with God’s help, that in the coming days, during the Sukkot holiday, I will be able to announce the return of all our hostages — both the living and the fallen — in one package, while the IDF remains deep inside the sector and in the areas controlling it,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on the evening of Oct. 4. Netanyahu also announced that he had instructed the negotiating team, led by Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, to travel to Egypt to finalize the technical details of the Israeli hostages’ release.

The Sukkot holiday lasts for a week. This year, it began on the evening of Oct. 6 and will end on Oct. 13 — meaning the timeline Netanyahu alluded to will come to a close on Monday. As of now, 48 hostages remain in the Gaza Strip — 47 of the 251 people abducted by Hamas during the terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Israeli authorities believe that at least 20 of them are still alive. The 48th hostage is IDF soldier Hadar Goldin, who was killed during a terrorist attack in 2014 and whose body was taken to Gaza. Israel is seeking the return of all hostages — both the living and the dead. So far, most have been released under two exchange deals, one at the end of 2023 and another in early 2025.

From the very beginning of the war, Netanyahu has said that he is pursuing two goals: the release of the hostages and the destruction of Hamas’s hold on the Gaza Strip. Nevertheless, many military experts believe that achieving both objectives is impossible — it has to be either the hostages or an end to Hamas.

Offensive operations in the Strip have alternately subsided and resumed. Meanwhile, the split within Israeli society has only deepened. Some believe that Hamas cannot be defeated without a full occupation of Gaza. Others oppose such an occupation, arguing that it would become a heavy burden for Israel — one that would worsen its international isolation and endanger the lives of both hostages and soldiers without even putting an end to the terrorist attacks.

In mid-September, the fighting intensified sharply when Israel launched an operation to take control of Gaza City. At the same time, criticism of Israel from the international community, particularly from European nations, grew steadily, with large-scale anti-Israel demonstrations taking place across the continent. Many academic, cultural, and sports organizations have refused to cooperate with Israelis, and the threat of economic sanctions also grew.

For the first time, G7 members France, the United Kingdom, and Canada have unilaterally announced their recognition of the State of Palestine. In the UN Security Council, only the U.S. continues to oppose such a step, as it shares Israel’s view that this recognition is a gift to the terrorists responsible for the Oct. 7 massacre.

However, Washington has also expressed dissatisfaction with the continued fighting in Gaza, primarily due to pressure from Arab monarchies like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE — longtime U.S. allies that have promised Trump they will invest billions of dollars in the American economy.

In addition, the Trump family and members of his inner circle — Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff most notable among them — have significant business interests in the Gulf states. Trump found himself in an especially awkward position after Israel struck a Hamas headquarters in Doha: in effect, one U.S. ally had violated the sovereignty of another. The incident culminated in Trump’s meetings with leaders of Arab and Muslim countries, including the Gulf monarchies, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York back in September. Trump’s interlocutors expected him to rein in Netanyahu and compel him to end the war in Gaza.

In principle, Trump heeded their demands: Netanyahu apologized to Qatar and, under U.S. guarantees, promised that Israel would no longer violate the country’s sovereignty. Moreover, Trump signed a document stipulating that any armed attack on Qatar’s territory, its sovereignty, or its critical infrastructure would be regarded as a threat to U.S. security. This move dealt a serious blow to Israel while simultaneously signaling Washington’s loyalty to its Arab allies.

Netanyahu also had to consent to Trump’s plan to end the war in the Gaza Strip. However, once the White House published the text of the plan, it became clear that the American president’s proposals largely aligned with Netanyahu’s own aims — though they did require certain concessions from Israel. The most painful of these was agreeing to grant amnesty to Hamas fighters who pledged to renounce terrorism, even allowing them to emigrate if they so wished.

These measures offer Hamas the opportunity to continue its operations against Israel. Moreover, the plan has many gray areas, most notably a vague description of security measures like the disarmament of Hamas. This raises questions about how the demilitarization of the Strip and the destruction of its military infrastructure, particularly the underground tunnels, would progress on the ground. However, what matters to Netanyahu is that Trump fundamentally insists on Hamas’s disarmament and the demilitarization of Gaza, while also allowing Israel to continue combating terrorists if they refuse to follow the proposed plan. In addition, Israel has been granted the right to keep its armed forces in Gaza for a considerable period. Even the return of hostages is not contingent on the withdrawal of troops.

Another key point for Jerusalem is the fact that the plan makes no mention of a Palestinian state. The document merely lays out that after the demilitarization and de-radicalization of the Strip and reforms within the Palestinian Authority, “pathways toward Palestinian self-determination and statehood” and “political prospects for peaceful and prosperous coexistence” with Israel will be discussed.

Trump also caters to the Arab side: the plan explicitly rules out any Israeli annexation or occupation of Gaza and there is no provision that would allow for the forcible displacement of Palestinians from the territory.

However, Trump’s plan contains no timelines. The document is a non-specific declaration of principles that may never be implemented. So far, the clause concerning the release of hostages appears to be the only one that might actually be carried out — though even that is uncertain. It was for good reason that Netanyahu was cautious in his speech, saying that the issue has not yet been fully resolved. Hamas’s demands may once again prove unacceptable to Israel, as they have several times before.

Hamas agrees, but with reservations

Hamas issued its response to Trump’s plan on Friday evening, agreeing to release the remaining Israeli hostages who are still alive and to return bodies under an exchange formula proposed by the American president. In return, Israel would free 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences — that is, terrorists with blood on their hands — and 1,700 people who were detained in Gaza after Oct. 7, including all women and children. In addition, for each Israeli released, Hamas is to receive 15 bodies of its fallen fighters.

The terrorist group also expressed its readiness to transfer control of the Gaza Strip to a Palestinian governing body composed of independent technocrats “based on national Palestinian consensus and supported by Arab and Islamic countries.” It is at this point that the group’s position begins to diverge from Trump's proposal.

The American plan indeed envisions a Palestinian committee handling all day-to-day matters concerning Gaza’s residents. However, Washington expects this body to operate under the supervision and control of a specially created international transitional authority — the “Peace Council,” chaired by Trump and joined by former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with other current and former high-ranking officials from various countries.

Hamas, however, made it clear that it will not agree to any form of external governance. The organization completely ignored the clause on disarmament and proposed discussing all other issues concerning Gaza’s future within a national Palestinian forum.

In interviews with Arab media, several members of Hamas’s political bureau provided clarifications to the group’s official response. Mostly, they reiterated earlier statements: that releasing the Israeli hostages within 72 hours is impossible without the withdrawal of Israeli forces, that surrendering its weapons is unacceptable, and that excluding the group from the Palestinian political process is not up for discussion. In addition, Hamas is dissatisfied that Israel would remain in the Strip for an extended period and that the plan outlines no specific timelines.

For Israel, none of these comments from Hamas came as a surprise, and in Jerusalem, officials assumed that a “yes, but” response from Hamas would not satisfy Trump. However, the American president saw it differently.

“Based on the Statement just issued by Hamas, I believe they are ready for a lasting PEACE. Israel must immediately stop the bombing of Gaza, so that we can get the Hostages out safely and quickly! Right now, it’s far too dangerous to do that. We are already in discussions on details to be worked out. This is not about Gaza alone, this is about long sought PEACE in the Middle East,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, apparently embracing the position voiced by Arab media, which interpreted Hamas’s response as acceptance of Trump’s plan.

The Palestinian side and its supporting mediators had reason to be satisfied. After all, the U.S. is exerting pressure on Netanyahu. Late on Friday night, the Israeli prime minister’s office released a statement announcing that the country was beginning the first stage of Trump’s plan to free all the hostages. Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir ordered the army to shift to purely defensive operations. However, clarifications soon followed: troops were instructed to open fire if they came under threat.

“We are in a state of reduced fire, not a ceasefire. In the first stage, all the hostages will be released. After that, we will continue negotiations,” a senior Israeli political source told the media on Saturday. In other words, Jerusalem made it clear that everything is proceeding according to the plan agreed upon with Washington — and that Trump remains on Israel’s side.

One point in favor of this position was Israel’s continued airstrikes on Gaza, even as Trump, in another Truth Social post, expressed his gratitude to the Israelis for temporarily halting the bombings. Nevertheless, this reality on the ground did not derail the indirect negotiations scheduled to begin Monday in Egypt, with mediators facilitating exchange talks between the Israeli and Hamas delegations. The question now is whether a quick agreement can be reached — as Washington and Jerusalem hope it can.

According to media reports, the U.S. and Israel had reached a preliminary agreement on maps for the withdrawal of Israeli forces, as well as lists of prisoners Israel is willing to release. However, Hamas has its own vision, meaning its lists may differ. Leaks in the media reveal that Hamas is demanding the release of the Nukhba terrorists — essentially the special forces of the group’s military wing — who spearheaded the Oct. 7 massacre. Their release is unacceptable to Israel, as is the release of high-profile figures such as Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, who was sentenced in 2004 to five life terms for the murder of Israelis (and to an additional 40 years for various attempted murders). Hamas's top priorities, however, are an immediate ceasefire and guarantees that hostilities will not resume after the hostages are returned.

In any case, there is no telling what will ultimately prove to be true. Negotiations are traditionally accompanied by conflicting rumors. On Sunday evening, the Saudi channel Al-Hadath reported, among other things, that the talks would be swift, the search for the hostages’ bodies had already begun, and Hamas was ready to hand over its weapons to a Palestinian-Egyptian committee under international supervision. Hamas quickly denied this report, but the only thing they achieved with their denial was to highlight deep divisions within the group.

Controversy within Hamas

The lack of a unified position among Hamas leadership regarding negotiations with Israel has been reported by various media. The discussion surrounding Trump’s plan triggered a new wave of coverage. The Saudi outlet Asharq Al-Awsat notes that many Hamas supporters, members, and officials now realize that the group’s prospects for maintaining power are diminishing.

Against this backdrop, some officials are already refusing to perform their duties and planning to leave, while others, believe it is necessary to hold on to their weapons until the very end.

The Wall Street Journal also reports a lack of consensus within Hamas regarding disarmament and the conditions for releasing the hostages. According to their sources, one of the most senior Hamas commanders in the Gaza Strip, Izzaddin al-Haddad, told mediators that he is willing to hand over missiles and other offensive weapons to Egypt and the UN for safekeeping, but wants to retain small arms that can be used for defensive purposes.

At the same time, Hamas commanders in Gaza fear that they may be unable to ensure that rank-and-file fighters comply with disarmament requirements. As WSJ emphasizes, many units of the terrorist organization in Gaza currently operate independently, without unified coordination. Mediators warn that if Hamas leaders accept Trump’s plan, some fighters may defect to other Palestinian groups.

Here lies one of the weak points in Trump’s plan, which addresses only the disarmament of Hamas and other obligations of the group’s members, making no demands of other forces fighting alongside Hamas, such as Islamic Jihad or the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. As a result, full demilitarization of Gaza remains a distant prospect. That said, even Hamas itself has not yet assumed any obligations beyond agreeing to enter negotiations.

This could reflect either an attempt to buy time and once again shift the blame for failed negotiations onto Israel, or it could be proof of a genuine desire to reach an agreement in order to survive.

Controversy within Israel

Hamas’s fears that hostilities might resume after the exchange phase are a source of hope for some Israelis, mainly from the right-wing camp. Bezalel Smotrich, Finance Minister and leader of National Religious Party–Religious Zionism, called Netanyahu’s decision to halt the operation in Gaza a serious mistake that risks weakening Israel’s position. Meanwhile, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir warned that his Otzma Yehudit party will not join the government if Hamas continues to exist after the hostages are released.

Nevertheless, neither announced a departure from the coalition, realizing that such a move would trigger early elections and cost them their seats. Furthermore, by leaving the government, Smotrich would also halt the implementation of projects he considers crucial for expanding the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).

Most importantly, as Newsru.co.il notes, by collapsing the government and triggering elections, Smotrich would be fighting not only for his own political survival but also for the return to power of the very government he had just left, since there is no better coalition option for the right than the one that currently still holds. However, members of the Knesset believe that Netanyahu will initiate early elections even if an agreement with Hamas is reached.

As for the parliamentary opposition, its leaders are ready to provide Netanyahu with a “safety net” to sign the deal and secure the hostages’ return in the event that his coalition partners refuse to back him.

For now, right-wing politicians hope that Hamas’s intransigence might once again, as Smotrich put it, “save us from ourselves.” At the same time, members of the far left, led by Yair Golan of the Democratic party, are urging that “Netanyahu and his right-wing government must not be allowed to derail the deal again.” Golan claims that such an agreement was on the table a year ago, but the government did not adopt it. (His position is not entirely accurate.)

Until recently, Hamas planned to stagger the exchange rather than return all the hostages at once, as Trump demands. In addition, Hamas refused to release hostages without Israel withdrawing from the Gaza Strip — or at least without guarantees that this would happen as part of the exchange deal. There was also no discussion of Israeli forces remaining at the border between Gaza and Egypt (the Philadelphi Corridor). Netanyahu insisted on this, emphasizing that Gaza was smuggling weapons and other items through tunnels from the Egyptian side. Trump’s proposals allow for this. Whether the outcome will actually follow this plan, however, remains uncertain.

But for Israel, the top priority now is the return of the hostages. In addition, agreeing to Trump’s plan and pushing it forward could reduce international pressure on Jerusalem. It is also significant that a group of Arab and Islamic countries has supported Trump’s plan, though, like Hamas, they demand clarifications. Admittedly, Israel needs to address gaps in the plan as well. One of the risks for Jerusalem is that Hamas could maintain its external structure and financial network with the support of Qatar and Turkey, which are always ready to act against Israel despite their status as mediators.

On the other hand, Israel gains a chance to further advance the Abraham Accords, which, in the event of a ceasefire in Gaza and the implementation of other points in Trump’s plan, could be joined by Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.

However, a sustainable end to the fighting is not an immediate prospect. Regardless of whether the hostages are returned to Israel or military operations in Gaza are halted, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will continue. After all, no agreement between the sides has yet led to peace.