The Gaza plan – and the rejection of Hamas – may have consigned armed resistance to history

Palestinians carry bags, wooden pallets and empty cardboard boxes as they leave a food distribution point run by the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation group, near the Netsarim corridor in the central Gaza Strip on October 5. A senior Hamas official on October 5 said the Palestinian militant group is eager to reach an agreement to end the war and implement a prisoner swap with Israel, as negotiators converge in Egypt for talks. AFPShow less

When US President Donald Trump staked his name on a 20-point plan to end the war in Gaza and chart a path towards a new Middle East, pledging to personally oversee its implementation, he didn’t do so on a whim. The drafting of the plan and its subsequent revisions were shaped by inputs from leaders of the Arab and Islamic world.

Embedded in it is a widespread recognition of the harm done to the Palestinian people by both the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023 and Israel’s violent response that continues to this day. Also implicit is an outright rejection of the logic of armed struggle to liberate Palestinians.

To be sure, beyond the broader vision to foster the conditions for peace in the region, the countries involved in the crafting of the plan have had their own motivations to do so.

Egypt’s interest, for example, was partly rooted in its opposition to the displacement of Gaza’s population into its borders for fear that this could lead to Muslim Brotherhood elements moving in as well. Indeed, the current Israeli government’s forced displacement policy has been motivated by its aim to not only take over Palestinian lands but also to push Muslim Brotherhood elements into neighbouring Egypt and Jordan.

Mr Trump’s plan seeks to halt and effectively replace this project with one involving voluntary migration for Palestinians.

Trump gives Hamas until Sunday to accept the 20-point agreement

00:53

The US President’s New York meeting with several Arab and Islamic leaders last month was significant because he finally appeared convinced that Israel’s schemes to destabilise its neighbourhood are not in the US’s interests. Equally important was the commitment made by key Arab and Islamic countries at the meeting to withdraw any form of support for Hamas.

These leaders anchored their position in the collective pursuit of international recognition for a Palestinian state, and in the pledge made by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas that any such state would be demilitarised.

There is a consensus among the plan’s drafters that the only way to save Palestinian lives from Israel’s full-blown assault is to encourage Hamas to surrender. At the time of writing, it was unclear whether Hamas would accept Mr Trump’s plan.

For its part, Iran also appears to have been forced to abandon its Gazan proxies, including Hamas, no matter how loudly it claims that it still leads the so-called Axis of Resistance. Today this coalition of militias lies in tatters, and should be deemed an axis of failure.

Of course, it could also be argued that countries which pursued the negotiation track with Israel have also failed, as evidenced by decades of unsuccessful attempts – such as the Middle East Peace Process as well as the Madrid and Oslo agreements – to reach a peaceful resolution to the Palestine-Israel conflict.

The reality today is that Israel’s neighbours are unable to confront it militarily

Israel has consistently rejected Arab peace offers, claiming there is no credible partner for peace, while extremists within the Israeli system have intended all along to implement their Judea and Samaria projects in the occupied territories. It is also a fact that successive US administrations have pampered Israel over the decades, letting it repeatedly break international laws, grab Arab lands and forcibly displace their inhabitants.

The reality today is that Israel’s neighbours are unable to confront it militarily.

Today’s Syria is no longer the Syria that self-servingly claimed to adopt the Palestinian cause and hosted armed Palestinian factions. Today’s Syria is seeking security arrangements with Israel and is ready to sign a deal, thus potentially becoming Israel’s third neighbour alongside Egypt and Jordan to sign a peace treaty.

Lebanon’s political balance remains tilted in Iran’s favour, but it may eventually free itself from Tehran’s grip under the pressures of reality, to become the last neighbour to board the peace train with Israel.

All of this is because armed resistance is no longer a viable option, whether it is directed from the Lebanese-Israeli border or from the Syrian-Israeli border. In other words, the Axis of Resistance is over.

Some will argue that the Palestinian cause is also over. Well, history has no doubt inflicted profound injustice on the Palestinian people, turning their cause into a calamity and their lands into playing fields for other countries. Palestinians are victims of the world and of their own leadership that, for decades, has been divided between armed resistance, diplomacy and vested interests.

One can certainly make the case today that the logic of armed resistance has been consigned to history.