US President Donald Trump’s recent proposal to resolve the Gaza conflict has been welcomed by some as a potential path to peace, but closer examination suggests it may further destabilize the Middle East rather than secure lasting solutions.
The plan, centered on establishing a temporary governing board in Gaza, assumes cooperation between Israel and Palestinian factions. However, Israel—one of the United States’ closest allies—has strategic interests that rarely align fully with those of the Palestinian people.
By privileging Israeli security concerns while offering minimal guarantees for Palestinian autonomy or long-term economic and political stability, the proposal risks reinforcing existing inequalities and grievances. Historically, similar externally imposed solutions have failed because they do not address the root causes of the conflict, including occupation, settlement expansion, and restrictions on Palestinian self-determination.
The plan’s emphasis on a temporary governing structure, rather than meaningful political empowerment, could exacerbate internal divisions within Palestinian society, creating a power vacuum and inviting further extremism. It may also strain relations among regional powers who view unilateral US-backed moves with suspicion, potentially inflaming tensions in an already volatile region.
Ultimately, any attempt at peace that sidelines Palestinian interests is unlikely to succeed. True stability in the Middle East requires equitable solutions, mutual recognition, and sustained international engagement—not unilateral proposals that favor one ally over another. Without these, Trump’s Gaza plan risks becoming yet another fleeting initiative that leaves the region more fractured than before.
