President Trump’s ‘20-point plan’ for Gaza presents itself as a pathway towards peace but in reality promises only a temporary reprieve from the violence while denying Palestinians sovereignty, political unity and the right to self-determination, which are essential for achieving permanent peace. Negotiated between the United States and Israel without input from Palestinian representatives, it offers a ceasefire without guarantees and fails to establish any roadmap towards a genuine two-state solution.
Limited short-term relief – no long-term guarantees
There are short-term elements that are to be welcomed. An immediate end to the killing, the release of hostages and detainees on both sides, and greater humanitarian access are urgent priorities that must be achieved without delay. (And should all proceed even in the absence of a longer-term proposal.)
Yet while Trump’s proposed plan would see Hamas disarmed and evicted from Gaza, it contains no enforcement mechanisms and no safeguards to prevent Israel from resuming the genocide once the hostages have been released. Despite promising a “complete staged withdrawal” of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, it fails to set out a timeline or milestones for achieving this. Netanyahu has already made clear his intention that Israeli troops will remain in “most” of Gaza – there are no proposals for tackling this intransigence. Given his long record of obstructing and derailing peace processes, including his recent attack targeting Hamas negotiators in Qatar and consistent denial of Palestian nationhood throughout his career, there is little reason to believe this plan will deliver more than a brief pause before Israeli’s bombardment and expansion resume.
Failure to recognise Palestinian agency
Equally troubling is the absence of any provisions for ensuring Palestinian input and self-governance. Oversight and supervision of Gaza would lie with a supposed international ‘Board of Peace’, chaired by Trump and including former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. This would oversee a non-political Palestinian technocratic body tasked with the day to day running of the Gaza Strip. Palestinians would be relegated to mid-level administrative roles, and the Palestinian Authority (PA) would be excluded from any meaningful involvement at least until it has completed an undefined and externally-imposed ‘reform’ programme.
Palestinians recognise that the PA needs reform and support, not least capacity building to be able to administer and rebuild the whole of its sovereign territory. It needs to hold elections (and Israel needs to be compelled to allow Palestinians to hold and participate in those elections). But the PA is the Palestinian government, one that the UK government has recognised. Its exclusion entrenches divisions between Gaza and the West Bank, a key aim of the Israeli government, and denies Palestinians the right to determine their own political future. Western governments cannot recognise a Palestinian state only to deny its current government any role in the rebuilding process.
Liberal Democrats must challenge the PA’s exclusion and make clear that their participation cannot be made contingent on conditions dictated by outsiders. Particularly concerning is the proposed requirement that it abandons cases against Israel in the international courts, a move that would constitute an illegitimate interference and a denial of Palestine’s sovereignty and the basic right to pursue justice through the rule of law. It would also undermine the future use of the international courts system to prevent and punish major breaches of international humanitarian law.
Bypassing established international frameworks
A transition cannot credibly be overseen by figures such as Trump and Blair, whose motivations and murky business interests remain unclear at best and whose records deny them any legitimacy in the eyes of Palestinians. Blair carries the lasting stain of the Iraq war in which no attempt was made by the occupiers to count the huge numbers of civilian casualties. As Middle East Quartet Envoy, he failed to challenge Israeli violence and settlement expansion, while Trump has long been an open ally of Netanyahu and an opponent of Palestinian statehood.
To bypass the United Nations and place authority in their hands is to create a process without accountability, transparency or a mandate under international law. A UN-led mission, with international legitimacy and a mandate to protect civilians on both sides, would offer the safeguards and impartiality that this proposal can never provide, as well as the significant levels of experience involved in facilitating such transitions.
No roadmap for statehood or an end to occupation
The plan is intentionally non-committal on Palestinian statehood, hinting only that conditions might one day allow for self-determination, while leaving Israel free to block progress indefinitely, as it has done for decades. It makes no reference to Israel’s unlawful occupation of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, nor to the state-backed settlement expansion and settler violence that have surged since October 2023. No mention is made of Israel’s legal duty as an occupying power to safeguard the welfare of Palestinians. By treating Gaza as an isolated problem, the plan reinforces the fragmentation of the Palestinian people and omits any framework for ending the occupation and uniting Gaza and the West Bank under a free and independent Palestinian state. This failure to tackle the underlying causes of the decades-old conflict all but guarantees an eventual return to violence.
There is nothing in this plan, or in the way that it was dictatorially produced, that shows an ounce of compassion for the suffering of the people of Palestine. Even since it has been announced, dozens of men, women and children have continued to be murdered day after day by the Israeli war machine.
For decades the Liberal Democrats have demanded a just two-state solution based on international law and the right of all peoples to self-determination. Today, just as recognition of Palestine is beginning to gain greater international traction, Trump’s plan undermines these principles by excluding Palestinians from decision-making and leaving the structures of occupation intact. What is needed is a UN-led process that upholds international law, guarantees Palestinian representation, and sets real milestones towards independence. While it does contain some genuinely welcome ideas, it is hard to see how such a fundamentally flawed ‘plan’ can form the basis for a credible, sustainable peace process.