So…last week I forgot to include a name and email field on our form for this. Iyou already filled this out (there were a few responses that I really want to talk to!), please fill out with just your name, email, and N/A (note one small thing from your application in one box) everything else, or just reply here.

Debaters: Interested in a specific topic? Think you have the chops to win a debate? Open to being wrong? Understand your opponents’ best arguments? This might be for you.

Moderators: We’re building a bench of Unmuted moderators - this is the glue that will hold the ship together. It’s a big role - need to be a natural active listener, able to reign in feisty speakers, and force conflict when the speakers themselves talk past each other.

And now…our next Member piece, written by Maura Cremin, a litigation associate at McDermott Will & Schulte. Maura leans conservative, which makes the following assessment of the fallibility of the Gaza Peace Plan that much more interesting. Let us know what you think!

The Gaza Peace Plan - Built to Last?

On November 17, the United Nations Security Council voted in favor of a resolution approving the Trump administration’s twenty-point Gaza peace plan. Thirteen countries voted in favor of the resolution, two (China and Russia) abstained, none voted against. This resolution marks the highest-profile international endorsement to date of the Trump administration’s plan to end the Gaza war. That the plan was passed without a single vote against it demonstrates considerable international buy-in, including from the Muslim world. 

With his usual combination of understatement and humility, President Trump has described the plan as “the greatest deal of them all” with the possibility to end 3,000 years of conflict in the Middle East. And Trump has real reason to take pride in a deal that has already borne significant fruit. All remaining living hostages have been returned to Israel. This alone is a seismic achievement, as it removes Hamas’s most potent leverage over Israel. Though Hamas had released tranches of hostages throughout the course of the war as part of negotiated ceasefires, it refused to release the final group of living men and dead bodies that it held. Instead, it had tortured the Israeli people with images such as that of a skeletal Evyatar David being forced to dig his own grave. The release of the hostages allows the Israeli population, which has followed their fate with intense and pervasive anxiety, the chance to begin to heal from the trauma of October 7th. Gazan civilians have begun to return to their cities, and aid disbursements have increased, though they have not yet reached the necessary levels to address humanitarian needs among the population.

In the turbulent political, military, and diplomatic cauldron of the Gaza conflict, Trump’s peace plan has emerged as the most comprehensive response to the crisis. In addition to Security Council approval, it has received support from Middle Eastern nations, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, Jordan, Morocco, Qatar, and Turkey. At the same time, the peace plan has a long way to go and faces many possible pitfalls. How successful has the plan been so far? And what are its likely prospects? 

As someone who has supported Israel throughout the war and has generally been pleased with the Trump administration’s approach to the conflict, I’m inclined to support the peace plan. Acceptance of the plan is likely to end major military conflict and improve conditions for both Israelis and Gazan civilians. It is not, however, likely to achieve what has been promised. Because there is no reliable mechanism for Hamas disarmament, the peace plan will probably result in a permanent ceasefire that does not amount to a productive peace. Unless the administration can enforce the disarmament of Hamas, the peace plan will amount to little more than a tourniquet—it may stop the bleeding and buy time, but it will not cause the patient to heal. 

The Gaza War

Following the heinous attacks of October 7th, 2023, Israel launched a massive military campaign in Gaza and secured control over most of the territory. Israel’s two stated aims were releasing all hostages taken by Hamas and dismantling Hamas itself as a military threat. The war stretched on for two years, with significant casualties on both sides. Approximately 2 million Palestinians and 250,000 Israelis have been displaced because of the conflict. Conservative estimates suggest that nearly 80% of buildings in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed. 

While Israel has killed many high-level leaders of Hamas, including October 7th mastermind Yahya Sinwar, much of Hamas’s terror infrastructure remains in place. Israel has been unable to dismantle Hamas’s labyrinthine tunnel system, which may include as many as 450 miles of tunnels. These tunnels have functioned as a mainstay of Hamas’s strategy, shielding Hamas fighters from Israeli airstrikes while allowing the terrorist group to hold Israeli hostages with little possibility of rescue.

The war also put severe strain on Israel’s global standing. Thousands of protests against Israel’s wartime conduct took place in cities from New York to London to Sydney. The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, along with Hamas commander Mohammad Deif. Since the war began, 21 states have formally recognized Palestinian statehood, which Israel resolutely opposes. In some instances, opposition to Israeli policies has spilled over into blatant antisemitism, and even targeted anti-Jewish violence. Within Israel itself, political division deepened over the government’s strategy, as well as military service by the nation’s ultra-Orthodox population. 

Despite this mounting domestic and international pressure, Israel’s position vis-à-vis its Middle Eastern neighbors is strong in many ways. Despite the war in Gaza, the Abraham Accords which were secured during the first Trump administration have held. Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, which have no love for Hamas but cannot be seen to publicly support Israel, have remained relatively quiet. Israel has also seized opportunities to eliminate threats besides Hamas, conducting high-profile attacks in Lebanon, Qatar, and Iran. The attack in Lebanon effectively decapitated Hezbollah, the militant group which had long been considered the greatest threat to Israel. The attack against Iran was particularly significant. This strike, which was carried out with the support of American B-2 bombers, demonstrated the close alliance between Israel and the United States under the Trump administration. It also shifted the balance of regional power away from the ayatollahs, creating opportunities for other would-be powers, including Saudi Arabia and Turkey. After two years of warfare, the Middle East that accepted the Gaza peace plan is a very different place than the Middle East of October 6th, 2023.

The Peace Plan

So, what are the terms of the Gaza peace plan? The plan itself includes 20 points, designed to be implemented in three phases. The first phase, which is the only part of the plan that both the Israeli government and Hamas approved, went into effect on October 9th, 2025. In this phase, military operations by all parties would immediately cease, and all hostages both dead and alive would be released within 72 hours of the deal being signed. In addition, nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners would be released by Israel along with the remains of 15 Palestinians for every Israeli body released. Israel would allow increased humanitarian aid into Gaza and would partially withdraw from Gaza. 

This phase of the agreement has largely been implemented, though not completely. All twenty living hostages have been released. As of this writing, the remains of all but one of the deceased have been repatriated. Hamas has claimed that the delayed return of the remains was a consequence of the bodies being lost in the chaos of the war, but Israel has released drone footage that they allege shows Hamas staging the discovery of bodies, leading to allegations that Hamas is slow-rolling the release of remains to delay the progress of the peace process. Though large-scale military operations have largely ceased, outbreaks of violence have occurred by both sides, including Israeli military strikes. And Hamas has taken advantage of the relative calm to execute dissidents and Gazans accused of collaborating with Israel, effectively consolidating its control over the Gazan territory.

The first phase is certainly the easiest to implement. The second phase, which has not been agreed to by the parties, but has been endorsed by the Security Council, is trickier. An interim Palestinian technocratic government will be established, overseen by a Board of Peace, which President Trump will chair. The Board is authorized to establish an International Stabilization Force (ISF) to assume security responsibilities in Gaza. Several Muslim-majority countries, including Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, and Azerbaijan, have agreed to commit troops to the ISF. Egypt and Jordan will help to train a Palestinian police force, along with some European military police, including the Italian carabinieri. The establishment of these bodies will allow the parties to begin negotiating Hamas’s disarmament and Israel’s eventual withdrawal from Gaza. Hamas leaders will be offered amnesty and safe passage out of Gaza into exile, while a deradicalization program will be implemented for the Gazan population. The Trump administration offered inducements to both Turkey and Qatar, American allies who are also backers of Hamas, to secure their support for the plan. Qatar received American security guarantees and Turkey was offered promises of advanced military aircraft. With both Qatar and Turkey on board, the agreement appears to have near-universal backing from the Middle East and indeed the broader Muslim world.

Even so, this phase of the agreement is showing cracks. Hamas has not agreed to phase two of the peace plan, claiming that “assigning the international force with tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favor of the occupation.” If anything, Hamas appears to be trying to consolidate control within Gaza by eliminating any opposition. At the same time, Israel has made clear that demilitarization is a non-negotiable condition of any lasting peace deal. The result is a catch-22 that threatens to either end the peace process or render it toothless. Hamas’s rejection of the peace deal makes it almost inevitable that the ISF will have to confront Hamas if it hopes to be effective. Yet while many Muslim-majority countries have expressed broad support for the deal, some, including the UAE, Jordan, and Azerbaijan, have expressed reservations about sending troops to fight Hamas. Similarly, Western governments, including the US, have been unwilling to put their troops in harm’s way in Gaza. By contrast, Turkey plans to contribute a brigade of 2,000 soldiers to the ISF. Yet Israel has balked at Turkish involvement in the ISF, given Ankara’s vocal support for Hamas. The upshot is that to secure the fundamental condition of Hamas disarmament, the parties must rely on either unwilling partners or Hamas supporters. 

Assuming the second phase of the deal is successfully implemented, the final phase of the peace plan would see the reconstruction of Gaza under the supervision of the Board of Peace. The World Bank and partner countries have committed to invest funds in Gaza’s redevelopment, which suggests that any parts of the territory that are able to secure peace are likely to see tangible improvements in living standards. Under this phase, Gaza would be governed by a reformed Palestinian Authority-led government. Ultimately, this phase offers the possibility of Palestinian self-determination and eventually statehood. The terms under which Palestinian self-governance would be achieved are admittedly vague, with no concrete steps towards the establishment of a Palestinian state. 

So What to Make of All This?

Peace in the Middle East is a white whale that has eluded world leaders for generations. The costs have been immense in blood and treasure, especially in the aftermath of the October 7th attacks. The Trump administration should be applauded for its efforts to secure a lasting peace. This deal has been the basis for a ceasefire that, for all its wavering, has held, saving untold lives in the process. It has led to the return of nearly all Israeli hostages. It has received unprecedented support from regional and global stakeholders who have publicly committed men and resources to its success. 

There are reasons to hope the current ceasefire will hold. All parties to the conflict are war-weary and have every reason to eschew a return to violence, at least in the short term. Gaza has been devastated and its people have suffered enormously through two years of air and ground conflict. Global support for the deal means that, for the first time, if Hamas rejects peace, it does so with no obvious source of international support. Israelis, likewise, have endured two years of sending their loved ones to war, of rocket attacks on their cities, and of anxiety about the fate of those held by Hamas. With the return of the hostages, it is not clear that the Israeli public is willing to return to a lengthy occupation of Gaza, particularly if some sustainable security guarantees can be implemented.

But the success of the ceasefire does not mean a lasting peace. Hamas has steadfastly refused to disarm and appears to be trying to shore up its territorial control rather than relinquish it. Yet Hamas demilitarization is the linchpin to the success of the entire peace plan. If Hamas is not disarmed, the interim government will face endless violent resistance which will prevent stability in Gaza. Hamas has a long history of murdering rivals that is likely to lead any member of the less-popular Palestinian Authority to think twice about trying to govern Gaza. And with both Western and Middle Eastern supporters of the peace plan reluctant to commit to enforcing it militarily, there is little credible threat to an intransigent Hamas. 

This is a situation Israel cannot accept. Israeli government leaders have rejected any move forward on the deal that does not include Hamas demilitarization. This reflects the Israeli population’s unwillingness to live next to an armed Hamas that could continue to launch rocket attacks at its civilian population or worse, plan another October 7th attack. If Hamas does not disarm, Israel is unlikely to fully withdraw from Gaza, and the ceasefire will turn into a stalemate, with any reconstruction efforts occurring solely under Israeli-controlled territory, while Hamas strongholds remain a persistent source of devastation, violence, and radicalism.

Such a stalemate is not inevitable. If regional powers, particularly those on whom Hamas relies for support, such as Turkey and Qatar, can put sufficient economic and political pressure on Hamas to force the group to accept disarmament, the Trump plan may succeed. But the Middle East is not a place that rewards optimism. For success to happen, the administration will need to remain deeply engaged to ensure that this critical next step is met. Otherwise “the greatest deal of them all” is likely to go down in history as yet another fanciful and unfulfilled promise.

January Unmuted Events

Wednesday, 1/14: Who is the Law For? An intimate dinner on whether too many lawyers are in fact, the problem. link

Thursday, 1/15 Unmuted Comedy Hour - A bipartisan comedy hour link

Show up, think deeper, and as always, stay Unmuted!

The Unmuted Team