Trump’s latest attempt at peace-making is not ideal but it was a collective effort

At last, there is a glimmer of hope of reaching an end to the killing in Gaza. Following the UN General Assembly last week there has been an incredible amount of activity culminating in President Donald Trump unveiling a 20-point plan to bring the best chance of ending the hostilities in Gaza.

As with all conflict resolution proposals, the plan is not perfect, and indeed even if accepted, a treacherous path lies ahead and dangers of getting sidetracked are all too clear. Inevitably, there have been a series of opinions expressed, from arguing that it ignores the rightful Palestinian claims to self-determination, to giving up Israel’s right to defend itself, to claims of neocolonialism, depending on who you choose to read.

These voices remind me of our own vast array of opinions over the infamous six-point Guterres framework for the Cyprus conflict. We have still not yet managed to find a common narrative over whether or not the framework calls for an end to Turkey’s unilateral military guarantees. In similar fashion, point 19 of Trump’s plan states: “While Gaza re-development advances and when the PA (Palestinian Authority) reform programme is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognise as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.”

The vagueness of the above wording has provided Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the opportunity to claim that he has not accepted the creation of a Palestinian state, something that he has vehemently opposed in the past.

The recognition of a Palestinian state has been at the heart of the Israel-Palestinian problem. There is no doubt in my mind that the recent, almost universal, call for a two-state solution to the conflict that was adopted at the UN General Assembly (including France, the UK, Canada, Australia and Saudi Arabia) has forced the sense of necessary urgency on the issue.

As it happens, the Trump plan has followed on the principles of a similar plan promoted by France and Saudi Arabia at the UN. The main differences relate to the composition and the period that the international transitional body will oversee the temporary, technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee which will be responsible for the day-to-day running of the strip.

What is retained is that Hamas will return all the hostages, lay down its weapons and dismantle as an organisation with no role in Gaza, whereas Israel is to gradually withdraw its troops to enable the reconstruction of Gaza with no forced relocation of its people. Something that is not mentioned in the plan but has been given the assurance of Trump is that no annexation by Israel of parts of the Palestinian West Bank will take place.

My own opinion is that the plan, even if it is tilted towards Israel’s favour, is nevertheless the best opportunity of ending the killing and laying the groundwork for a long and difficult path to peace.

At the time of writing Netanyahu had accepted the proposal and hopefully, by the time you read this, the Arab nations will have persuaded Hamas to do so as well. After all, as reported in the Financial Times, Israel’s opposition leader Yair Lapid said that the Trump plan formed the “correct basis for a hostage deal and the end of the war”. He went on to say that the plan was already on the table a year and a half ago.

It appears that, behind the scenes, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner had been working to formulate the compromise solution. Blair who is said to be one of the proposed members of the overseeing international transitional body –albeit his role is hotly contested because of the 2003 invasion of Iraq – along with Trump, who will be the chairman, is arguably entitled to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump is surely going to have other ideas about that.

It appears that, contrary to the domestic front, Trump is slowly allowing himself to change his mind in his dealings with international matters. His recent reversal on Ukraine – now claiming the country can regain all lost territory – shows he has realised his touted ties with Putin were merely an illusion Russia used for its own benefit.

On October 7 it will be two years since the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas started this part of the war in the long struggle between Israel and the Palestinians. October, also marks 80 years since the birth of the UN, and on a more personal note, one year since I started writing in the Sunday Mail. My first column, “We need to remodel the UN to be fit for purpose” reflected on the failure of the UN to prevent the war in Gaza and how the UN needed to be restructured so as to be able to enforce decisions rather than simply issuing toothless resolutions.

President Trump’s speech at the UN in September, embarrassing as it was, did identify correctly how the UN had failed to live up to its purpose. How the US itself has contributed to this sad state of affairs was conveniently skipped over by the president. Perhaps now, with the Trump Peace plan for Gaza, and the collective effort to bring this to the table, an opportunity arises to lay the foundations of a more effective UN, and in the words of John Lennon, give peace a chance.

                                     ****************************************

For the Succession fanatics among you, I felt the need to add a postscript and update you on the latest developments at the Federal Reserve. The US Supreme Court has postponed its decision regarding the firing of Lisa Cook from the board. As it is, she remains on the board until January 2026 when a final decision will be made. The key date when the appointment of the regional Reserve heads is to be decided in February 2026. How these people know how to build up the suspense is remarkable.