On 29 September, US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveiled a 20‑point Gaza cease‑fire plan from the White House, sparking expert critique.
Background of the Plan
On 29 September, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a 20‑point proposal aimed at ending the Gaza war. Both leaders said the plan was a major step toward peace and called on Hamas to accept it. The points require Hamas to relinquish weapons, abandon its political role, release all hostages, and grant amnesty to members who pledge peaceful coexistence. Trump warned that failure to meet the conditions would leave Israel fully backed in eliminating the threat.
Expert Assessment
Dr. Bartosz Bojarczyk of Maria Curie‑Skłodowska University in Lublin praised the plan as “an excellent initiative.” He noted that the United States offered a comprehensive package, not just an armistice, and commended its detail. However, Bojarczyk warned that the proposal still demands adjustments from Palestinians while giving Israel leeway: actions are conditional on Palestinian compliance.
Key Provisions and Conditions
The plan lays out a return of all residents to Gaza, reconstruction, demilitarisation, and a withdrawal of international troops. It also proposes a Peace Council—an international governing body—to administer Gaza after an agreement is signed. Bojarczyk highlighted the importance of this council and the rollback of Israel’s military presence.
International Involvement and Implementation
According to the expert, success hinges on global engagement. The introduction of neighbouring states’ or international forces and the establishment of the council are seen as positive steps. Bojarczyk added that Israel must eventually retreat from Gaza, which would then fall under the council’s control. He argued that broader participation—especially from the EU, the UK, France, and Germany—would enhance the likelihood of stopping the violence and rebuilding the territory.
Palestinian Expectations
The plan applies only to Gaza and does not address Palestinian statehood or the West Bank. Bojarczyk called it a compromise that would stop immediate bloodshed but falls short of a comprehensive settlement. Palestinians, he said, would prefer a treaty covering all Palestinian lands, not just Gaza.
What Hamas Can Do
Dr. Bojarczyk view the proposal as an offer Hamas ought to accept. He noted that Hamas had previously agreed to a ceasefire that was later broken by Israeli forces. The senior scholar argued that while some arms might be surrendered, others may remain, reflecting the complex position of Gaza and the shifting pressure from within Palestinian society.
Conditions for Last‑Term Peace
He contended that a full peace treaty between Israel and Palestine could only materialise under international auspices, clearly defining borders, state functions, and governance arrangements. Bojarczyk warned that neither side is currently willing to negotiate; the Palestinians desire talks, but Israeli forces often halt them. Fragmentation among Palestinians further hampers any durable solution without a comprehensive accord.
Fundraising Appeal
The article concludes with a call for donations to a Polish medical mission sending doctors directly to Gaza, urging readers to contribute for on‑site aid.
