The plan unveiled by US president Donald Trump and Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to end the war in Gaza has been welcomed by many in the Middle East and beyond. It offers the possibility, at least, of an end to the Israeli onslaught which has killed nearly 70,000 Palestinians and reduced much of the territory to rubble. The plan presents 20 points , and sets out measures for the governance and reconstruction of Gaza in the immediate and longer terms, which would follow a ceasefire by both sides. While the objectives are laudable, there is much that is highly problematic.
The terms of the plan require both sides to agree to end the war immediately, to be followed by the return of all Israeli hostages, and the release of Palestinian prisoners by Israel. Once this is done, Hamas members who commit to “peaceful coexistence and decommission their weapons will be given amnesty” while members who wish to leave Gaza will be given safe passage. Hamas must commit to having no governance role in Gaza’s future.
The longer-term plan for governance of the territory includes the establishment of a new international “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump, and including Tony Blair. The board is charged with the redevelopment of Gaza for an indefinite period until the Palestinian Authority has completed a reform programme. The plan envisages the establishment of a temporary “International Stabilisation Force” to provide security in a postwar Gaza, but is vague on the details.
One of the most extraordinary, and controversial, elements of Trump’s plan concerns the role of Blair.
READ MORE
A great deal of what is in Trump’s proposals reflects the contents of a 21-page blueprint for post-conflict Gaza on which Blair has been working since the first months of the war. The former UK prime minister took part in a policy session on Gaza’s future at the White House in August, organised by Jared Kushner. And earlier in the year, Kushner commissioned the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change to develop a postwar plan for Gaza.
Blair’s plan envisaged the creation of a Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA). The GITA would have a board composed of seven to 10 members, with just one “qualified” Palestinian representative. The others would be leading international figures with executive or financial experience. Three individuals were specifically mentioned – Neguib Sawiris, an Egyptian billionaire; Marc Rowan, an American billionaire; and Aryeh Lightstone, a former adviser to David Friedman who, in turn, was a staunch defender of Israel’s illegal settlement movement when he was US ambassador to Israel.
Blair’s involvement in any governance structure for post-conflict Gaza would inevitably be controversial in the Middle East.
Firstly, he will forever be associated with the disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003, for which he offered unconditional support to then-US president George Bush. The report of the 2016 Chilcot inquiry disclosed a message from Blair to Bush in which he stated that he would support Bush “whatever”, indicating – in the view of the inquiry – that Blair had chosen to join the invasion of Iraq “before peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted”. The invasion led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, the rise of jihadist Islamists, and the undoing of the regional order in the Middle East at great cost.
Blair’s engagement with the region did not end there. On leaving office in 2007, he took up a position as special envoy of the Quartet, comprising the US, UN, EU and Russia, committed to promoting a peaceful Israeli-Palestinian settlement. However, he was widely perceived as favouring Israel and never enjoyed widespread Palestinian confidence. By the time he stepped down in 2015, he had ceased to have any significant role.
Blair has enjoyed other relationships in the region. Documents found in Tripoli after the fall of the Gadafy regime revealed some details of his relationship with the Libyan dictator. Blair took two trips on one of Gadafy’s private jets, making no mention of this on his website. Previously, he had held six secret meetings with Gadafy after leaving office.
In 2014, he was advising Abdelfattah al-Sisi, the autocratic Egyptian president, having previously welcomed Sisi’s role in the overthrow of Egypt’s only democratically elected leader, Mohammed Morsi, in a 2013 military coup. Later again, it was revealed that Blair’s foundation continued its multimillion-pound partnership with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, even after the murder of dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018 – which, according to a US intelligence finding, was ordered by bin Salman.
Regardless of Blair’s prominent role, Trump’s plan was welcomed almost immediately by leaders in the region and beyond.
[ What’s in Trump’s 20-point peace plan for Gaza, and will Hamas accept it?Opens in new window ]
The prime minister of Qatar, while acknowledging the “practical and implementation challenges” inherent in it, stated that it tackles the most urgent priority – ending the bloodshed in Gaza while opening the door to “opportunities”. In a joint statement issued almost immediately after the launch of the plan, eight key Arab or Muslim-majority states welcomed Trump’s role and “his sincere efforts at ending the war”. Five of these already have diplomatic relations with Israel. The statement was also signed by Saudi Arabia, whose future recognition of Israel is a key objective for both Trump and Netanyahu.
While ending the violence is a commonly shared objective, for Egypt the plan also offers a potential economic opportunity from the reconstruction of Gaza which could channel billions of dollars into the Egyptian economy. Its success would also remove the threat of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Gaza being expelled into Sinai.
One of the greatest criticisms of the plan is the fact that it was drafted with little input, if any, from Palestinians. In demanding the demilitarisation of Hamas and its exclusion from governance in Gaza in the future, as well as the return of the hostages, it satisfies some of Netanyahu’s key objectives.
[ Trump and Netanyahu’s new Gaza plan is a far cry from ‘the Riviera of the East’Opens in new window ]
The fact that Trump offered the Israeli leader his full backing to “finish the job” of destroying the threat of Hamas deepens suspicions that the plan constitutes an ultimatum to Hamas, rather than a starting point. Whether the Hamas leadership can accept what many see as surrender to Israel will be clear soon.
Certainly, the movement is coming under pressure to accept, especially from its patrons in Qatar and Turkey, but also from Palestinians in Gaza who will, understandably, support anything that brings an end to the war.
However, whether Netanyahu is seriously committed to the deal is questionable. Standing next to Trump on Monday as he outlined the role of the “International Stabilisation Force” in overseeing security in post-conflict Gaza after Hamas is demilitarised, Netanyahu suggested something quite different: “Israel will retain security responsibility, including a security perimeter for the foreseeable future.”
A rejection of the plan by Hamas could suit Netanyahu, allowing him to appear to have sought an end to the war, while retaining the full support of the US for its continuation. And it would maintain the support of far-right ministers in his coalition who could bring down Netanyahu’s government if they decided to oppose the plan.
