Beyond Sharm El-Sheikh: Can Peace Survive the Politics of the Holy Land

harm El-Sheikh, Egypt: In a landmark development, US President Donald Trump declared the Gaza war “over” as he arrived in Egypt’s Sharm El-Sheikh for a high-profile Middle East peace summit. The announcement followed a major hostage and detainee exchange deal between Israel and Hamas, marking the first tangible step in Trump’s ambitious 20-point Gaza Peace Plan which is a very nice step.

Under the agreement, Hamas released 20 Israeli hostages and 28 bodies, while Israel freed about 2,000 Palestinian detainees. However, despite the breakthrough, core issues like Gaza’s governance, reconstruction, and security remain unresolved — casting doubt on whether this marks the end of the conflict or just a pause.


The hostage exchange represents only the opening phase of Trump’s sweeping Gaza peace initiative.
While the release of captives brought a brief sense of relief, the next stages — disarmament, reconstruction, and governance — pose far greater challenges.

Trump’s 20-point framework envisions:

  • Disarming Hamas and establishing long-term security guarantees for Israel and Gaza.
  • Rehabilitating displaced Gazans, restoring humanitarian aid, and rebuilding destroyed infrastructure.
  • Forming a governance structure for post-war Gaza — though the plan offers no clarity on whether Hamas, the Palestinian Authority (PA), or a new international administration will take charge.

Critics argue that the plan’s vague nod to Palestinian statehood without defining political representation risks repeating the mistakes of past peace efforts.


The Sharm El-Sheikh peace summit brought together key world leaders — yet the meeting appeared more like a show of unity behind Trump than a platform for genuine dialogue.

Palestinian representatives were not included in the talks, leaving unresolved the core issues of occupation and self-determination.
Analysts warn that while the hostage exchange was achievable, sustaining peace in Gaza without addressing longstanding political grievances will be far more difficult.

As one Middle East expert put it, “The current truce looks more like a diplomatic intermission than the end of war.”


Trump’s plan proposes an international stabilization force comprising troops from Arab and Muslim countries to maintain order in Gaza.
However, the success of this force depends on Hamas’s cooperation — which has not been secured.

Without full disarmament or consent, Trump’s peace plan risks stalling, leaving Gaza’s future uncertain and the ceasefire fragile.


A striking aspect of this peace process is Trump’s extraordinary influence over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Unlike previous US presidents, Trump has directly compelled Netanyahu to comply with his directives — from halting a planned airstrike on Iran to issuing an apology to Qatar after an Israeli strike in Doha.

This unprecedented power dynamic has allowed Trump to push through key aspects of his Gaza peace plan, giving Washington unparalleled sway over Israeli decision-making during the conflict.

Yet, reports suggest Trump’s interest may be waning, especially after not winning the Nobel Peace Prize — a disappointment he has privately voiced. Analysts fear that once global attention fades, Trump may scale back his involvement, jeopardizing the plan’s implementation.


For Netanyahu, a lasting peace could be politically perilous.
The Gaza war diverted public scrutiny from his ongoing corruption trials and domestic unrest over judicial reforms.
A permanent ceasefire could revive public anger over Israel’s intelligence and security lapses during the October 7 attacks, potentially leading to renewed calls for his resignation.

Observers warn that Netanyahu might accuse Hamas of violating the agreement, using that as a pretext to withdraw from the peace deal and maintain political control.


India welcomed the ceasefire and hostage release, calling it a step toward “lasting peace and stability” in the region.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised President Trump’s leadership and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s resolve, reaffirming India’s support for a negotiated two-state solution.

In an official statement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) emphasized India’s consistent stance on dialogue, diplomacy, and peaceful resolution of conflicts.
New Delhi also commended Egypt and Qatar for their mediating roles in facilitating the truce.


While the end of active fighting marks a major diplomatic milestone, peace in Gaza remains fragile.
Without a clear post-war governance model, sustained aid, and mutual political commitment, the region could easily slip back into conflict.

Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan has achieved its symbolic victory — but whether it delivers sustainable peace or becomes another short-lived truce depends on what comes next.


Scroll to Top