Will there finally be peace in Gaza?

One never goes too far wrong by being pessimistic about events in the Middle East. Even when the stars seem aligned and peace is at hand something happens to shatter any residual optimism. There seem to be too many unwilling to abandon their absolutist objectives and habits of violence for common sense to last for long.

When Trump announced his peace plan on 29 September many commentators accepted that it was as much as one could hope for in the circumstances but nonetheless it would probably fail. Certainly, in terms of international support, it had a lot going for it, but there were doubts about the ability of either Israel or Hamas to make the necessary concessions to ensure the plan’s success, and these doubts remain.

Hamas is effectively required to accept defeat while Israel must scale back its objectives and even allow the faintest possibility of an eventual Palestinian state. The transitional arrangements are murky and the timetable uncertain. Any plan promoted by Donald Trump and involving Tony Blair invites scepticism. And so on, and so on. Trump, who can outdo anyone when it comes to rhetorical extravagance, claimed that the day of the announcement was ‘potentially one of the great days ever in civilization,’ but, for those who have seen euphoric days come and go as likely it was just another step on the road to despair.

And yet I want to be optimistic. The only way to bring this horrible war to an end must be a situation in which neither Israel nor Hamas rule Gaza, and the only way to get to this situation first requires the release of hostages and the end to Israel’s military operations. Whatever transitional authority is created must have a strong technocratic element to manage the immense task ahead as well as forces from Arab and Muslim countries to bring a modicum of order to the territory. A prominent Palestinian element will be needed to have any legitimacy among the population. This is what is now on offer and we are close to reaching the first crucial stage.

It is not the best plan, but the best circumstances allow. As the Economist noted, whatever its faults, it is better than ‘today’s unending mass suffering’ and the ‘alternatives of occupation, anarchy or rule by a reconstituted Hamas.’ It is far away from Trump’s previous fantasies about a ‘Gaza Riveria’ or his administration’s less fantastical but more alarming readiness to back the current Israeli government in not only rejecting any idea of a Palestinian state but also in pushing Palestinians out from the West Bank as well as Gaza.

Two years after the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023 the world has had enough of the slaughter in Gaza. Hamas is on its last legs if not defeated enough for Israel. Israel can keep on fighting but faces increasing international condemnation and isolation as it does so and has yet to manage its own answer to the key exam question of what comes next. The time is ripe.

Trump has answered the exam question for them. Others, including Biden last spring, have come up with similar conclusions, but, unlike Biden, Trump has found a way to extract major concessions from the Israelis. The pessimists warn of the pitfalls ahead and they are right to do so. These processes unfold in stages, and there are stages to come where the whole process might fall apart. I will consider those at the end of this post. I will concentrate on the history of the plan, because that allows for the best explanation of why it takes the form it does. It also tells us something about the politics and challenges of peace-making. Even if this process falters any future aftermath plan will have many of the same elements.