Israel did not declare war on the Gaza Strip only to fight a two‑year campaign — suffering extensive material and human losses in the longest war in its history — so that it could then withdraw and tell the Palestinians, “This is your throne; take it.” Anyone who expects such an outcome is profoundly detached from reality and lost in the realm of imagination. This analysis is further enhanced by the expansionist aspirations of Israeli nationalist right to establish settlements in the Gaza Strip as an integral part of the “promised land.” For the first time in the history of the state of Israel, the religious dimension and its use in this war was strikingly evident through the remarks and statements of Israeli officials, politicians and military officers.
It has become completely clear that US President Donald Trump’s plan for the Gaza Strip is facing mounting complications that render its future uncertain and fragile. The plan was initiated amid conflicting Israeli positions and the conditions set by Hamas as well as evolving regional and international developments that are shaping its trajectory and prospective outcomes. What further underscores this reality is the official statements issued by Hamas leaders, which empathically reject any form of disarmament on one hand, while on the other seek a political course that guarantees the group’s survival and control over what remains of the Gaza Strip. Statements of Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Hamas leader, reaffirmed the group’s refusal to relinquish its weapon by any means. This position is a direct challenge to President Trump’s plan and failure to implement what is known as the second phase of the plan. In addition, Khaled Meshaal’s statements on the group’s desire to open a dialogue with the US administration and its readiness for a long-term truce with Israel clearly confirmed Hamas’s grip on power in Gaza and its unwillingness to leave governance or proceed to the second stage of Trump’s plan.
On the other hand, Israel still insists on maintaining its position and retaining control over what is known as the “yellow line,” and it will not withdraw until Hamas is disarmed. In the event that no international party disarms Hamas, Israel has made it clear that it is fully prepared to carry out that task. In addition, the Chief of the General Staff of Israel Eyal Zamir stated that the “yellow line” has become the new border of the Gaza Strip with Israel.
As such, we are facing a new reality in Gaza, marked by complex complications on both sides that prevent the implementation of the Trump plan. These complications are divided into two main parts. First, the Israeli government’s refusal to fully withdrawal from Gaza beyond the “yellow line” and return to the borders before October 7, 2023, and second, Hamas’s stance on the issue of weapons, whether regarding their surrender, organization, collection or disarmament, which is a central obstacle to any future arrangements in the Gaza Strip. This includes the group’s stance on reconstruction, humanitarian aid delivery and the promotion of stability.
The deployment of international forces, as part of the plan, also faces significant obstacles. This was clearly evident at the recent Doha meeting where more than 40 countries were invited, yet no more than 15 countries attended. Those countries confirmed at the meeting that they were unwilling to deploy their forces under Hamas control and refused any confrontation with the group and its members. In other words, they rejected the Israeli vision that such forces would assume the task of disarming the group forcibly in the Gaza Strip. At the same time, Israel still insists on excluding any role for the Palestinian National Authority in the Gaza Strip and selectively vetoed the participation of some countries in the proposed forces, such as Türkiye. The latter is perceived as a key regional weighty state and could play a pivotal and direct role in implementing the agreement. As a result, Israel’s rejection of any role for the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip and the exclusion of Türkiye’s participation in the proposed international forces are a major obstacle to the completion of the second phase. The Doha meeting stressed the need of a leading role for the Palestinian National Authority in the Gaza Strip. In addition, Israel’s refusal to include Türkiye, a guarantor party and a signatory to the Sharm el-Sheikh understanding, will undermine the effectiveness of these proposed international forces and affect how Hamas engages with them.
Amid such a stalled peace process, many leaks have begun to surface in the Israeli media regarding potential amendments to the Trump plan. Most of these leaks suggest the possibility that Hamas and its weapons could remain in place, while the Israeli presence inside the Gaza Strip persists. Although no official US or Arab sources verified the leaks, they strongly suggest that implementation of the agreement is facing serious obstacles on the ground.
Trump’s main objective with his plan has been achieved: the return of Israeli hostages both the alive and deceased. Trump propagated their return as a political achievement to the US public opinion. Meanwhile, the cessation of hostilities and daily massacres in the Gaza Strip was an Arab and Palestinian achievement and foiled the plans for the forced displacement of the Gaza people. However, the full implementation of the agreement and the move to the second and most critical stage appears practically difficult and far from attainable. Israel has yet to fulfill the obligation of the first stage, including the delivery of humanitarian aid, lifting the blockade, the opening of the Rafah crossing and the halt of hostilities that continue to claim civilian lives while Hamas steadfastly refuses to surrender weapons and relinquish governance in the Gaza Strip.
In light of these developments, the United States will likely opt for a compromise solution, effectively consolidating the de facto policy: roughly 60% of the Gaza Strip would remain under Israeli control, with the remaining 40% under Hamas control. Concurrently, reconstruction and resettlement of Palestinians will likely begin in the southern areas of the strip, especially Rafah, through mobile homes and projects implemented by US and Israeli companies, as a provisional solution to the mounting Gaza’s humanitarian crisis.
Thus, both Israel and Hamas are going to entrench the fait accompli in the Gaza Strip through division and maintaining the status quo. This will result in two separate areas and systems in the Gaza Strip: one under Israeli control where the reconstruction and the resettlement will take place and another under Hamas control suffering from blockade, closure and humanitarian crises while Israel continues to target it through rapid military operations or precision strikes. This fulfills Israel’s objective of establishing the “yellow line” as the new border between Israel and the Gaza Strip, without US intervention, as the Trump administration is preoccupied with more pressing and sensitive issues, especially Ukraine and Venezuela.
