Introduction: A Summit with Limited Momentum
The hostage exchange at Sharm El-Sheikh signaled a potential first step in a broader effort to stabilize a volatile region. Yet as observers sift through the diplomatic rhetoric, it’s clear that the real work—disarming Hamas, securing Gaza, and rebuilding a shattered enclave—remains unresolved and fraught with political risk. The plan’s immediate momentum risks evaporating once negotiators return to their capitals and domestic pressures reassert themselves.
The Hidden Hurdles: From Ceasefire to Governance
There are multiple stumbling blocks embedded in the plan. The immediate objective, the hostage exchange, was only the first phase. The heavy lifting lies ahead: dismantling Hamas’ control in Gaza, establishing a security framework that can be trusted by the Palestinian population, and initiating a legitimate process to rebuild the enclave. Without credible guarantees and a viable governance model, even a successful ceasefire risks becoming a temporary lull rather than a durable peace.
Discussions about who will govern Gaza after a potential transfer of functions remain vague at best. While there is a nod toward Palestinian statehood, the plan provides little concrete commitment, leaving a core question unresolved: who will administer Gaza in the long term, and under what legal and political terms?
Palestinian Voices and the Risk of Exclusion
The real challenge is not merely military or financial; it is inclusivity. The participants assembled at Sharm El-Sheikh appear to be acting in concert with former U.S. President Donald Trump’s framework, yet the Palestinians themselves were not at the table in any substantive way. That exclusion risks eroding legitimacy and may sow skepticism about the plan’s durability once headlines fade and the next crisis emerges.
Experts emphasize that a lasting peace requires a meaningful Palestinian voice in the process and a clear path toward ending occupation in a manner that satisfies international legal norms and regional concerns. Without this, the specter of a stalled process looms large, with both sides waiting for the other to blink first.
The Security Equation: An International Stabilization Force?
The plan’s proposed stabilizing force—composed of Arab and Muslim states—faces formidable obstacles. Hamas has not committed to disarming, and the acceptance of foreign security arrangements in Gaza is politically sensitive inside Palestinian society. Without Hamas’ consent, coupled with a credible security guarantee and a mechanism to deter escalation, the envisioned force risks becoming a bargaining chip that never translates into real control on the ground.
Leverage, Personal Calculations, and Political Risk
The dynamic between Trump and Netanyahu adds another layer of complexity. Trump’s leverage over Netanyahu has shaped recent alignments, from hostage releases to nighttime operations that altered the strategic calculus. Yet both leaders face domestic pressures that could complicate long-term commitments. Netanyahu’s domestic legal concerns and political vulnerabilities could motivate a cautious approach, with a preference for a measured path that avoids triggering a wider regional backlash.
The Road Ahead: What Is Needed for Real Progress
Analysts suggest that for any peace plan to move beyond rhetoric, it must address core structural questions: how to end Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories in a way that is enforceable; how to ensure an accountable governance framework for Gaza; how to mobilize international support for reconstruction and aid that reach ordinary Palestinians; and how to guarantee security for Israel without perpetual conflict. An enduring solution will require inclusive diplomacy, credible enforcement mechanisms, and a timeline that provides tangible rewards for all sides without sacrificing principles.
Conclusion: Hope Delivers to Action—not Spectacle
Sharm El-Sheikh demonstrated a rare moment of regional convergence, but the road from spectacle to sustainable peace remains long and treacherous. The next steps will need to transform high-level statements into concrete, verifiable actions that satisfy both the Palestinian people’s rights and Israel’s security concerns. Without that, the plan risks becoming another chapter in a cycle of ceasefires and broken promises.
