The Biggest Hurdles to the Next Phase of Trump’s Gaza Deal

Introduction

The initial phase of President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace initiative has been successfully executed.

A ceasefire came into effect on October 10, 2025, and the preliminary prisoner-hostage exchange is underway.

However, considerable obstacles threaten the progression of the plan’s subsequent phases, which comprise a comprehensive twenty-point framework.

The current agreement, in which Hamas consented to relinquish all remaining Israeli hostages in exchange for approximately 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, constitutes only the initial step in an intricate diplomatic process.

This process is characterized by unresolved disputes that could readily precipitate renewed conflict.

Hamas Disarmament: The Key Impediment

The primary challenge lies in Hamas’s complete disarmament—a fundamental prerequisite that the organization categorically opposes.

Reports suggest that Hamas may exhibit some flexibility in private negotiations; however, publicly, it refutes any agreement to surrender its weapons, dismissing such claims as "baseless” and attempts to "distort Hamas’s stance."

The group considers armed resistance integral to its legitimacy and has governed Gaza through military control since 2007.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has been unequivocal regarding Israel’s position, asserting that Hamas “must lay down its weapons” and that Gaza must be “demilitarized” for lasting peace to be achievable.

He has warned that if disarmament cannot be accomplished through diplomatic means, military action will be necessary.

Analysts indicate that Hamas might only consider the transfer of certain “offensive weapons", such as missiles, while retaining small arms, light weapons, and concealing the extent of its tunnel infrastructure.

This network, estimated to span 350-400 miles and extend up to 200 feet underground, constitutes a strategic military asset that Hamas is unlikely to relinquish.

Israeli Withdrawal and Territorial Control

The scope and timetable of the Israeli military withdrawal remain significant issues.

Although Israel has completed its initial withdrawal to the so-called "yellow line,” maintaining control over approximately 53 percent of Gaza, future withdrawals are contentious and lack a clear definition.

Trump’s plan envisions a phased approach, involving withdrawal to a “red line” with international forces, followed by retreat to a “security buffer zone” that would still leave parts of Gaza under Israeli oversight.

Hamas demands a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces to prevent a resumption of hostilities; however, Prime Minister Netanyahu has indicated that a complete withdrawal cannot be guaranteed.

Even after the full implementation of withdrawal measures, Palestinians would continue to operate within a territory smaller than pre-conflict boundaries, which would maintain significant Israeli control.

The ambiguous wording concerning the final timeline for Israeli withdrawal fosters uncertainty that Hamas finds unacceptable.

Domestic Political Dynamics and Government Stability

Prime Minister Netanyahu faces considerable pressure from far-right coalition partners, who could threaten the stability of his government.

Notably, Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have expressed strong opposition to the deal. Ben-Gvir condemned it as a “surrender to terror” and warned of government collapse if Hamas rule is not entirely dismantled.

Conversely, political opposition figures, including leader Yair Lapid, have offered support to prevent government instability, and external pressures from former President Trump—who has personal stakes in the deal—further complicate internal political calculations.

The far-right ministers have moderated their stance somewhat, recognizing that opposing President Trump directly entails significant risks.

Governance and International Oversight

One of the most complex challenges involves establishing legitimate governance structures within Gaza following a ceasefire.

Trump’s plan proposes an internationally supervised, technocratic Palestinian authority under a “Board of Peace," led by Trump and including former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. This proposal faces several obstacles.

Although the Palestinian Authority (PA) was marginalized initially, it asserts a significant role owing to its international standing and ongoing administrative functions in Gaza, including the payment of salaries to civil servants.

PA Prime Minister Mohammad Mustafa emphasized the Authority’s existing infrastructure and capabilities.

The plan also entails deploying an International Stabilization Force, with limited American military involvement—200 troops to Israel for coordination, but none within Gaza.

Arab nations remain reluctant to commit ground forces absent explicit Palestinian consent, including from Hamas, which presents a fundamental contradiction regarding oversight.

Economic Reconstruction and Resource Mobilization

The scale of reconstruction required is formidable.

According to recent World Bank estimates, costs are projected to be approximately $80 billion over ten years, which exceeds four times the combined gross domestic product of the West Bank and Gaza.

This necessitates sustained international engagement and robust governance frameworks.

Addressing Hamas’s influence over Gaza’s economy and social fabric is critical.

Effective reconstruction will require dismantling the organization’s economy of corruption and establishing new economic systems that generate legitimate employment opportunities for the populace.

Trump’s Personal Investment and Timeline Concerns

President Trump’s desire for recognition, including potential consideration for the Nobel Peace Prize, adds urgency and complexity to the negotiations.

Although he was bypassed for the Nobel, his intent to participate in an official signing ceremony underscores his vested interest.

This personal involvement provides leverage over Prime Minister Netanyahu but may also pressure negotiators for a swift resolution, potentially compromising long-term stability.

Trump’s warning of dire consequences should negotiations fail reflects his significant stake in the outcome.

Historical Precedents and Skepticism

This framework bears striking similarities to previous agreements, such as the ceasefire of January 2025, which lasted only 42 days before collapsing under right-wing pressure.

Analysts, including former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, note that Hamas has recruited almost as many militants as it has lost, illustrating enduring security threats.

Expert opinion suggests that unresolved issues—including disarmament, territorial withdrawal, and cessation of hostilities—could impede durable peace.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies underscores the risk that the current accord may only serve as a temporary hiatus.

Key challenges to Trumps peace-plan

The main challenges to Trump’s Gaza peace plan include a severe lack of trust between Israel and Hamas, the unequal demands favoring Israel, Hamas’s refusal to disarm without an independent Palestinian state, and political opposition within Israel to issues like Palestinian Authority governance and Israeli troop withdrawals.

Furthermore, sidelining Palestinian self-determination and unclear plan details pose risks to its approval and implementation, compounded by the complex roles of regional players such as Egypt and Jordan in security enforcement.

Key Challenges

Trust Deficit

A near-complete absence of trust exists between Israel and Hamas, with vague plan elements creating fears that either side might claim violations, obstructing lasting peace. Past ceasefires have quickly broken down over similar issues.

Hamas Disarmament

Hamas has long resisted disarming without a recognized Palestinian state, and the plan calls for its disarmament and Gaza governance end, threatening Hamas’s political and military authority. This remains a significant obstacle.

Israeli Political Opposition

Netanyahu faces resistance from far-right groups demanding total victory and Gaza annexation. His political survival depends on their support, limiting full implementation of the plan.

Palestinian Agency and Governance

The plan excludes Palestinian groups from negotiations, places Gaza under a technocratic international-supervised transitional committee, and sidelines Palestinian self-determination, drawing widespread criticism as neocolonial control.

Ambiguities and Conditionality

Vague or conditional terms—such as timelines, scope of Israeli withdrawals, conditions for Palestinian reforms, and security arrangements—generate uncertainty and risk delays or unilateral actions.

Regional Security Cooperation

Effective enforcement depends on clear roles for Egypt, Jordan, and other Arab states, but their commitments are uncertain, risking enforcement gaps and support failures for Gaza’s administration.

While Trump’s peace plan aims to address security, political, and humanitarian issues in Gaza, major obstacles include trust deficits, political opposition, Hamas’s disarmament resistance, exclusion of Palestinian self-governance, and unclear implementation conditions.

These deeply rooted issues make the plan’s success uncertain despite broad international support.

Conclusion

The success of Trump’s Gaza peace effort hinges on tackling interconnected challenges while preserving fragile political alliances.

The upcoming 72-hour hostage-release window will serve as an initial test of mutual good faith.

Even if successful, significant negotiations on Palestinian sovereignty, Israeli security guarantees, and international oversight remain. Whether Trump’s influence and personal commitment can overcome these obstacles will determine prospects for peace in the Middle East in 2025.