Overview: A 20‑point blueprint to end the Gaza war
In a moment described by some observers as a potential break in the Gaza crisis, the United States unveiled a 20‑point plan intended to halt the war and pave a path toward a long‑term settlement. The document was presented alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and delivered, through mediators from Qatar and Egypt, to the Palestinian movement Hamas. The plan calls for an immediate ceasefire, a staged Israeli withdrawal, and a sequence of steps to secure the release of hostages, all contingent on broad international backing.
President Trump framed the moment as potentially one of the most meaningful days in modern civilization, while signaling that the path forward would require compromises from all sides. He did not hold a press conference after the briefing, noting that “we should probably wait for signatures and green lights from many countries.”
The core of the compromise: a ceasefire, withdrawal, and hostage release
The proposed plan would immediately halt active hostilities and initiate a phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. The timetable hinges on the green light from Israel to proceed with the next steps. In parallel, the plan envisions the release of hostages within 72 hours of such authorization, followed by the release of several thousand prisoners over time—specifically, 1,700 Gazans detained since the Oct. 7 attacks and 250 Palestinians condemned to life imprisonment.
Advocates argue that this sequence is designed to build trust, reduce civilian harm, and create a window for durable political arrangements, while supporters of the plan emphasize the need to safeguard both security and humanitarian concerns for Gaza’s population.
A technocratic Palestinian authority and a “peace committee”
A central feature of the U.S. proposal is the creation of a temporary, technocratic Palestinian authority to manage daily affairs in Gaza, expressly excluding Hamas from governing power unless it embraces a genuine political transformation and renounces violence. The authority would operate under the oversight of a “peace committee” chaired by President Trump, with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair set to take a leading advisory role. The arrangement aims to separate governance from militant factions and restore stability while a broader political settlement is negotiated.
International support and political reactions
The plan drew mixed responses from international leaders. French President Emmanuel Macron publicly urged Israel to fully commit to the framework and called for Hamas to release all hostages immediately. Tony Blair, for his part, welcomed the project as “bold and intelligent.” The Palestinian leadership, along with several Arab states, lauded the efforts of the U.S. team as a clear signal of determined diplomacy.
Security, displacement, and the role of an international force
Among the plan’s notable humanitarian safeguards is a pledge that no one would be forced to leave Gaza. The proposal also contemplates the deployment of an international stabilisation force (ISF) to manage security in Gaza in the immediate aftermath, backed by regional and international partners. The aim is to guard against renewed violence while enabling reconstruction and governance reforms.
What happens next: signatures, scrutiny, and hurdles
The document was handed to Hamas negotiators by mediators, and both Israel and Washington signalled that while the plan is ambitious, its success depends on broad international endorsement and Hamas’s willingness to participate in a credible transition. The administration indicated it would provide full support to Israel if Hamas refuses or obstructs the process, underscoring the delicate balance between deterrence and diplomacy.
Context and implications
Since the Oct. 7 attacks, casualties have mounted on both sides, with the Israeli tally including a significant number of civilian deaths and hundreds of hostages still in Gaza, while Gaza’s health authorities report thousands of fatalities and widespread humanitarian crises. Analysts caution that the plan would require wide regional backing and a credible enforcement mechanism to prevent a relapse into open conflict. Still, backers argue that the framework offers a structured path toward stopping the war, addressing hostage fates, and laying the groundwork for a political solution that could, over time, redefine governance in Gaza.
