| A |
fter over two years of a live televised genocide, a ceasefire has been agreed in Gaza.
Earlier, US President Donald Trump had come up with a 20-point peace proposal for Gaza, or the New Gaza. Points 13 and 14 of the proposed plan say, “New Gaza will be fully committed to building a prosperous economy and to peaceful coexistence with their neighbours,” and that “…New Gaza poses no threat to its neighbours or its people.”
Is it New Gaza or Neo-Gaza, the latter being a mere reinterpretation? Let us focus on how Trump’s peace blueprint raises questions about sovereignty and Palestinian self-determination.
The News on Sunday talked to Dr Naeem Ahmed, Chairperson of the Department of International Relations at the University of Karachi, about Trump’s Gaza Plan in the context of power politics and whether it represented a genuine step toward peace.
Dr Ahmed said power politics could not be kept out, considering the use of power tactics and American influence. He said it was a unique blend of Trump’s ambition and unconventionality. “We need to understand what President Trump wants. He is an unusual sort of American president eager to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Given the stated goals of the plan – an immediate end to violence, the release of hostages and withdrawal of the Israeli forces - Dr Ahmed said it was important to focus developments on the ground. “One can’t analyse what may be happening until there is some evidence.” He said, “States have their own interests to watch. We need to consider the interests of all regional and global actors, including the Arab countries and Israel, as well as the US.”
Dr Ahmed said the Arab/ Muslim states were highlighting the immediate end to the genocide. He said Israel’s interests included disarming Hamas and creating demilitarised zones to enhance its security.
Dr Ahmed said one also needed to look beyond the stated humanitarian concerns of the Muslim and Arab states, which have their own strategic interests. He also mentioned the Ben Gurion Canal project, proposed by Israel’s first prime minister as an alternative to the Suez Canal. Should the plan go ahead and be successful, Gaza would end up under Israeli control. The canal will connect the Mediterranean with the Red Sea. Such a project could not have been possible with millions of Palestinians living in Gaza. In 1956, UK, France and Israel had attacked Egypt after President Nasser closed the Suez Canal. The closure was a major shock, as the canal handled about 12 percent of global trade. While Israel denies this, Dr Ahmed said the existence of such a plan could not be ruled out.
Dr Ahmed said the US was also eyeing the oil and gas reserves on Gaza’s coastal belt. “President Trump has indicated that Gaza can be transformed into a modern city, creating economic opportunities that attract Western capital and international institutions. This vision reflects their own economic interests in developing Gaza into a global, modern hub.”
The Trump peace plan doesn’t talk about a Palestinian state, the two-state solution or the UN resolutions. Point 19 mentions statehood, but is too ambiguous.
Trump’s plan features a Board of Peace including a transitional government of technocrats under institutional oversight. It is to be headed by President Trump and include former British prime minister Tony Blair. Dr Ahmed said this posed significant challenges. “The overall structure of this arrangement is not clear. It could end up being similar to the League of Nations mandate. One cannot say what will be the status of the Palestinian Authority or how it will be reformed? How will the indigenous population react to it?”
Dr Ahmed said that even if it was a genuine effort for peace, it may not work out if the Palestinians reject it. This leads to the question of self-determination, which the plan doesn’t talk about. “It doesn’t talk about a Palestinian state, the two-state solution or the UN resolutions. Point 19 mentions statehood, but is too ambiguous for a serious analysis at this stage.”
How does this plan compare, in terms of feasibility and inclusivity, with the past efforts?
“As I see it,” said Dr Ahmed, “this plan is quite unlike the Oslo Accords of 1993 and Oslo II of 1995. The agreement reached between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, the then Israeli prime minister who was assassinated in 1995, has been sabotaged by his successors including Netanyahu.”
Dr Ahmed pointed out that Trump’s peace plan did build on the progress made in the Oslo Accords. “Still, we need to see how the proposed plan moves ahead. We need to see the outcome of the ongoing negotiations between Hamas and Israel.”
Regarding the Oslo process, Dr Ahmed recalled that under it, “The PLO acknowledged Israel’s right to exist. In return, it was recognised as the representative body of the Palestinian people. The agreement affirmed Israeli citizens’ right to live in peace, the redeployment of Israeli security forces and the transfer of powers to Palestinians in areas such as local governance, health, education, social welfare and tourism.”
However, major issues — including the status of Jerusalem, the return of refugees and the demarcation of borders — were left for the final round of negotiations.
Dr Ahmed added: “Following the return of hostages, Netanyahu could face pressure from his hardline allies in the parliament, particularly since he has been saying that he does not support a two-state solution (or a Palestinian state). The question of Hamas’s disarmament also looms large.”
“Hamas is unlikely to disband,” he said. “There’s also ambiguity around Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. Trump and Netanyahu set some timelines during discussions at the White House, but the plan leaves room for Israeli forces to stay until Gaza is deemed secure. This means that if there is an incident, Israeli forces could remain in Gaza. That uncertainty is what the Muslim and Arab states, as well as Hamas, are worried about.”
Perceptions andpositions
Dr Ahmed said that Pakistan’s response had been measured and cautious. “Pakistan’s principled stance on the two states solution is clear. Of course, Pakistan will not abandon it.”
The writer, a communications professional at IBA Karachi, holds a master’s degree in international relations. Her writing focuses on global affairs, climate change and culture. She can be reached on X: mariaamkahn