Trump touts near-term Gaza peace deal as clashes persist
Former President and current candidate Donald Trump told Axios on Saturday that the framework for a Gaza peace agreement is “very close,” even as Israeli forces conducted airstrikes in the territory. The remarks come amid a flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Israel, Hamas, and regional players, and follow a White House plan unveiled this week that envisions a ceasefire, hostage exchanges, and a staged Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
What the plan envisions
Trump described a multi-point framework that emphasizes an immediate ceasefire, a hostage-prisoner exchange, and a transition toward a governance arrangement involving international mediation. The proposal, which he said was well received “every country of the world,” also includes disarmament of Hamas and a transitional government backed by international actors. The interview underscored the political stakes as the region braces for the next phase of negotiations.
Key players and positions
Trump highlighted a pivotal position that Netanyahu’s government would need to support the plan, saying the Israeli prime minister has no real alternative if the United States is backing a path to peace. He also credited Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan with pressing Hamas toward hostage releases, describing Erdoğan as a “tough guy” but “a friend of mine” who was instrumental in moving the process forward.
On-the-ground reality in Gaza
While Trump spoke of progress, the situation on the ground remained volatile. Israeli airstrikes and artillery fire continued in parts of Gaza City, and a Gaza civil defense agency report indicated ongoing strikes despite statements favoring a pause. The gap between public diplomacy and battlefield realities is a common feature in negotiations of this scale, as both sides weigh security concerns against political timing.
International optics and the broader aim
Trump separately asserted that the United States would work to rehabilitate Israel’s standing on the world stage, saying that international support for Israel had diminished but could be recaptured through a successful deal. He framed the plan as a victory for Israel and a path to regional stabilization, while acknowledging the complex calculus of regional allies and adversaries alike.
What happens next?
With several stakeholders publicly signaling openness to a negotiated settlement, the next few days are likely to be critical. The White House plan’s insistence on an immediate ceasefire, coupled with a staged withdrawal and an international-backed transitional government, would require careful synchronization among Israel, Hamas, Egypt, Jordan, and other influential actors, as well as robust guarantees for hostage safety and humanitarian access.
Context and significance
Any accord in this cycle would constitute a milestone in a conflict that has cost thousands of lives and raised concerns about broader regional stability. The push to secure a deal reflects long-running efforts by the United States and allied parties to prevent further deterioration, while addressing deep-seated grievances on both sides. As negotiations unfold, observers will watch for concrete steps that translate rhetoric into verifiable actions on the ground.
