by RENE WILDANGEL
Trump’s plan for peace in Gaza was drafted without key parties, then presented with ultimatums — hardly a foundation for lasting peace
How do wars end? A rather banal but empirically verifiable finding from peace and conflict research is that peace treaties have a better chance of being upheld if they have been negotiated as concretely and carefully as possible. Measured by this standard, the pompously announced ‘Trump plan’ for ‘eternal peace’ is a farce: drawn up largely without the conflicting parties, at the discretion of the President and his confidants. At least one party, Hamas, was not even consulted beforehand, but was asked to agree to it afterwards by means of an ultimatum.
At the very least, the plan includes the possibility of an ‘amnesty’ for those Hamas leaders who lay down their arms. This approach could have been pursued months ago, but instead Netanyahu and his allies consistently spoke of the complete ‘destruction’ of Hamas — an unrealistic and nonsensical goal from the outset, as Hamas is not only a militia but also a broadly based political and social movement. Worse still, Israel has actively thwarted attempts at negotiation in recent months, even bombing a Hamas negotiating delegation in Doha. This may have been the point at which Trump felt compelled to intervene, after tolerating and supporting Israel’s devastating offensive for months.
However, after the publication of the ‘Trump plan,’ Israel’s disastrous military operation in Gaza City continued. Massive attacks, increasingly carried out by automated weapon systems, are destroying the few remaining medical and humanitarian facilities and civilian infrastructure; the catastrophic supply situation makes survival virtually impossible for the remaining civilians — a situation that, according to all major human rights organisations and most recently a UN commission of inquiry, constitutes genocide.
Supreme peacemaker
The dystopian situation in Gaza and the monstrosity of the crimes committed there by the Israeli army are probably the reason why Trump’s somewhat bizarre plan immediately became the last glimmer of hope for finally ending the Gaza war: an immediate ceasefire, full humanitarian aid, and the instant return of all Israeli hostages — these are long-overdue and justified demands in this plan, which must be supported unconditionally.
And yet, the numerous other passages of the ‘20-point plan’ are either extremely vague or contain highly problematic proposals that do not point towards détente or even conflict resolution. The fact that, among others, the German Foreign Minister Wadephul praised the plan as a ‘unique opportunity’ and effusively thanked the US President is therefore not only surprising but also dangerous. The plan has nothing to do with the parameters for conflict resolution advocated by the EU. Wadephul and his EU colleagues would be well advised to make a clear distinction here: support for the initiative for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid and the release of hostages; clear demarcation from the rest of the plan and, instead, clear communication of the parameters for the further political process.
IPS-EU for more