Is There a Gaza Peace Plan?

Posted on by

I’m skeptical, and from Juan Cole’s description even if it goes through it’s unlikely to be a permanent solution.

On 29 September, President Donald Trump advanced a peace proposal that essentially preserves Israeli pre-eminence regarding the fate of Palestinians, though it entails a cessation of hostilities, an affirmation that Gazans would not be expelled (those leaving would have the right to return), and an injunction against Israeli annexation of the Strip.  But Hamas, militarily and politically, would have to surrender all claims, with the Palestinian Authority shepherded and supervised by foreign powers.

Right-wing extremists in Israel are furious, Cole says. And there have been headlines that make it sound as if Hamas has agreed to the proposal, but it really hasn’t. David M. Halbfinger writes for the New York Times,

This did not go the way Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted.

On Monday, the Israeli leader won a peace plan from President Trump that promised him total victory, in the form of a take-it-or-leave-it message to Hamas. The militant group would have to release all the Israeli hostages remaining in Gaza within 72 hours, lay down its arms and surrender any role in the territory’s future — or Israel would be given a free hand to pursue the group’s destruction.

On Friday, responding to a new ultimatum from Mr. Trump, Hamas announced that it was ready to release all the hostages. But it said nothing about how soon it would do so, demurred on laying down its arms, and said it wanted to “discuss the details” of Mr. Trump’s plan.

To Senator Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Mr. Netanyahu’s, this was “in essence, a rejection by Hamas” of the president’s proposal, he wrote on social media.

To Michael Herzog, Mr. Netanyahu’s former ambassador to the United States, it was “a ‘no’ cloaked as a ‘yes,’” he said in an interview.

There are 20 points in the proposed plan, and nobody’s yet agreed to most of them.

Back t5o Juan Cole:

On the issue of governance, a temporary technocratic “apolitical Palestinian committee” of qualified Palestinians and “international experts” would form a temporary transitional body, subject to a “Board of Peace” personally chaired by Trump. 

So that’s doomed.

Most unfortunately, it is likely to include such figures as Sir Tony Blair, the Middle East’s typhoid Mary when it comes to peace.  The transitional authority would hold the reins till reforms by the Palestinian Authority had been completed.  With immediacy, however, the US would work with Arab and international partners to deploy an “International Stabilisation Force” to Gaza.  The ISF will be responsible for training Palestinian police forces and provide support in terms of vetting recruits, with assistance from Jordan and Egypt.

We don’t know who will be in this “International ‘Stabilisation’ Force,” but I’m betting a lot of them will be U.S. troops.

At this point just about anything that would get Israel to back off and allow food and other aid into Gaza would be welcome. But back to the New York Times:

The turn of events on Friday night was also likely to threaten Mr. Netanyahu’s governing coalition. His right-wing partners had already been informed, through Mr. Trump’s Monday proposal, that they would have to abandon their dreams of forcing Palestinians to leave Gaza for good, allowing Israelis to settle and annex the coastal enclave. Now, they were effectively being told that Hamas would not be going away after all, and might not even agree to disarm.

“I don’t see how his coalition partners can live with that,” said Shira Efron, an analyst on Israeli policy at RAND Corporation, a think tank.

So this is way far away from a done deal.

 

13 thoughts on “Is There a Gaza Peace Plan?”

  2. The Fascist Orange ? is really jonesing for a Nobel Peace Prize, isn't he? Unfortunately, anything he touches dies, so I won't expect to see him in Stockholm any time soon.

    3

  5. I find the dynamics interesting in that it is possible that Trump's lust for a Nobel Peace Prize will split the alliance between the US and the government of Israel. Trump will not adhere to his own 20-point plan in negotiations. That was a 'peace' photo-op, for Trump's scrapbook, and for Netanyahu after the UN delegates walked out in advance of Netanyahu's speech. Netanyahu's reply was: "I have the US under my thumb – I can exterminate the Palestinians if I want." That was the tune, but the lyrics were, "We have a peace plan," which has all the merit of the Germans' work plan for captured Jews.

    Suppose the Palistinians give up the hostages, all of them, to a US delegation in Gaza according to an agreement signed by the Great US Negotiator, DJT, (don't puke) where the American President guarantees the starvation of Gaza will end and the IDF will withdraw their forces. (Mind you, this is sheer stupidity for an American president to guarantee what a foreign government will do on foreign soil. But I think Trump is that stupid and ambitious for the NPP.) Here's the power shift that will happen: Netanyahu will scream bloody murder for an agreement he was not party to (exactly what he and Trump did this week.) Trump can say, "Do you want continued us support, military,, economic, and in the veto we exercise in the UN?" 

    If Netanyahu says, "I don't need your weapons and money," Trump can pivot to make an alliance with the entire rest of the world to levy sanctions against Israel. The UN and especially Europe MIGHT be in a position to insert themselves into a global council committed to the long-term process of implementing a two-state solution, 

    WILL this happen? I would not bet my Postal pension on it, but I'm much more concerned about the mass murder that's happening in Gaza than depriving Trump of brownie points. I feel the same way about the war in Ukraine – I want it over with Ukraine having sovereignty and security.  They have earned it and I don't care who takes credit. 

    1

  6. Richard Nixon had one thing on KKKancles, he knew to defer to Henry Kissinger on matters of state and treated Henry as a superior authority to himself.  KKKancles, of course cannot defer or admit to any authority other than his own in any matter at all mush less peace.  

    Kissinger saw peace as power in balance or at least talked in such notions.  He saw power as much larger than military power, with awareness of soft power and economic power.  Today we have no one even talking in those terms.  We also have a very different world power structure of course and one in flux.  

    KKKancles has no idea of any of this.  He operates on more of the biggest bully theory.  Keep shaking things up and sooner or later something good will happen you can take credit for or profit from it.  It is much cruder and works at times.  Unfortunately, a lot of bad happens too.  You just make sure it happens to other people you don't like or people far away.  So far, he has some still duped into thinking it is working.  Mostly those people who hate the way he hates and the ones he hates. The hate for profit industry is sure booming.  They are huge supporters of all he stands for.  Constant chaos assures them of a party time that goes on forever.  Chaos is their friend balance is their enemy.  Peace could break out as accidents do happen.  If so, then switch to take credit and make profit mode.  It is so easy.

    1

  7. Hamas disarms and disbands. Given the US and Israeli records of assassination and treachery I am sure this will be popular. And this ignores the inconvenient fact that Hamas is the legally elected government of the Palestinian Authority. BTW, has anyone noticed the death rate among former members of the FARC in Columbia.

    Tony Blair who as Prime Minister of the UK was the principal if not only head of state/gov’t to support the US invasion of Iraq—I think he saw it as a Christian crusade against Islam—is going to be the head of administration. There has not been such a brilliant choice since Paul Bremer was named chief administrator of Iraq.

    I suppose it is possible that Trump actually thinks this is a viable plan and his idiot cabinet members and advisors are too stupid or too cowardly to mention that it is nuts.

    This peace plan is a lot like the peace plan NATO and associated hangers-on dreamed up to end the Ukrainian conflict. It's a "great plan" but maybe someone should have consulted the opposing side? 

    I just looked at some of President Putin's remarks about the plan. He says that Russia conditionally supports Trump's plan and then shreds it. Putin tends to be polite when pointing out utter stupidity.  He and Juan Cole are likely in close agreement. 

     

    1

    • I strongly agree, though I'll quibble about Blair's motivation for supporting the invasion of Iraq.  NeoLiberals like Blair know that religion is for poor people; 'crusades' are beneath them.

      Blair's *enthusiastic* support for the invasion was more likely based on political considerations:

      – sucking up to the USA has been a core Policy for Britain since [before?] WWI.

      – sucking up to the Cheney Regime was a delicate matter, as Blair was essentially the British Bill Clinton.

      – British Petroleum wanted a share of Iraq's oil, and Blair wanted campaign money (Brit campaign finance laws are as weak as ours).

      – Many Brits – especially the Upper Class – still long for [at least the illusion of] a return their former Imperial glory, and Blair was glad to feed that dream.

      I also suspect – admittedly without evidence – that Blair was 'influenced' by the British version of what we call the Israel Lobby, through techniques like those which Jeffrey Epstein perfected: a combination of extortion (do what we say or your career is over) and bribery (do what we say and you can have some more 'Candy').  (It's also possible that Blair was merely protecting the Royal Family from exposure).

      • I'd agree with all of your reasons but I still hold to the opinion that Blair was thinking "crusade". He was High Anglican, I think,  while in office and apparently converted to Catholicism after leaving office.

        I suspect he was mixed up enough think the <b>Christan</b> West needed to beat off the Islamic hordes. 

         

        BTW, an interesting look at the crusades. Lost causes just like Iraq. On Crusades, or, how not to identify with losers

        1

    • And this ignores the inconvenient fact that Hamas is the legally elected government of the Palestinian Authority.

      That's a stretch, considering that the last Palestinian election was in 2006. That's, um, awhile. There are Palestinians of voting age today who hadn't yet been born then. If the legitimacy of government comes from the consent of the governed, we have no idea what consent the people of Gaza would give now. 

      1

  8. If Trump can split Netanyahu's coalition over this, I would not mind, I think.

    Is it possible for the Netanyahu government to be replaced by something worse?

Comments are closed.