On October 13, 2025, world leaders gathered to sign the Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity, a document that underscored the urgency—and the complexity—of achieving a lasting ceasefire and peace in Gaza. This event came against the backdrop of a fragile truce between Israel and Hamas, which, despite holding since October 10, had already been tested by accusations of violations and renewed violence on both sides, according to reports from TIME and The Conversation.
Donald Trump’s 20-point plan, which formed the backbone of the new peace effort, prioritized the release of Israeli hostages and the distribution of humanitarian aid as immediate steps. But as analysts and diplomats alike have pointed out, these measures are only the beginning. The plan’s broader vision—calling for dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a “political horizon for peaceful and prosperous co-existence”—faces daunting obstacles rooted in decades of mistrust, trauma, and inequality.
“It’s not easy. I never said it was easy. But what I am is optimistic that the cease-fire is going to hold and that we can actually build a better future for the entire Middle East. But that’s going to require some work,” U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance told reporters in Jerusalem after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Isaac Herzog on October 21. Vance’s visit, alongside Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, was not a reaction to the latest clashes but had been planned in advance—a sign, perhaps, of the sustained American commitment to the process.
Yet, if optimism is in the air, so is caution. The ceasefire itself, while holding as of October 22, remains precarious. Over the weekend of October 18-19, Israeli forces reported that Hamas had violated the truce by killing two Israeli soldiers in Rafah, prompting retaliatory airstrikes and a temporary halt to humanitarian aid. Hamas, for its part, accused Israel of 21 violations on October 19 alone, bringing their tally to 80 since the ceasefire began—alleging 97 Palestinian deaths and over 230 injuries. These figures, provided by Hamas, cannot be independently verified, but they underscore the deep-seated grievances and ongoing violence that threaten the agreement’s durability.
In this tense environment, the Trump plan’s call for a “Board of Peace”—with Trump himself as chair and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in an executive role—has sparked both hope and skepticism. The proposal envisions a fragmented, non-independent Palestine, administered under international supervision, rather than a fully sovereign state. This, critics argue, fails to address core issues such as the dismantling of Israeli military occupation in the West Bank or the realization of Palestinian self-determination. As The Conversation notes, “Neither the Trump’s declaration nor the 20-point ceasefire plan include any practical action to dismantle Israeli military occupation in the West Bank. Nor do they attempt to formulate any realistic programme for Palestinian self-determination.”
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s stance remains a formidable barrier to the two-state solution long advocated by much of the international community. At the United Nations General Assembly in September, Netanyahu declared, “Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7th is like giving Al-Qaeda a state one mile from New York City after September 11th.” This rhetoric, which equates Palestinian statehood with existential threat, reflects a pattern of “othering” that has become entrenched in Israeli politics and, according to observers, makes mutual empathy and compromise all but impossible.
The challenges are not merely political but deeply social and psychological. Both Palestinian and Israeli societies have, over time, developed narratives that dehumanize the other. Palestinian critics highlight the Israeli school curriculum’s failure to acknowledge the Nakba—the mass displacement and trauma of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Conversely, Israeli officials note that Palestinian textbooks often omit reference to the Holocaust and to Israel’s legitimacy as a state. This mutual denial of suffering, as The Conversation points out, “has become deeply entrenched over time, leading to mutual dehumanisation which has created the atmosphere in which violence can flourish.”
Extremism and racism have further exacerbated the divide. A recent United Nations report accused Israeli troops of committing genocide in Gaza, citing inflammatory rhetoric from senior officials. Former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant referred to Palestinians as “human animals,” and Netanyahu himself invoked the biblical story of Amalek—a call, in ancient terms, for total destruction—when addressing Israeli troops on the eve of the Gaza assault. Such language, coming from official state voices, raises alarm about the normalization of violence and the fusion of religious and political extremism.
On the ground, the ceasefire’s implementation is fraught with logistical and humanitarian challenges. Hamas returned two more bodies of deceased hostages to Israel on October 21, signaling ongoing engagement in the process, but disputes persist over the return of all bodies and the circumstances of their deaths. Israel has released around 150 bodies back to Gaza, facilitated by the International Committee of the Red Cross, while Hamas alleges that some of the returned bodies show signs of abuse—a claim the Israel Defence Forces strongly denies, stating, “The IDF operates strictly in accordance with international law and the bodies returned are those of combatants.”
The Trump administration, meanwhile, has taken a tough line on ceasefire violations. In a Truth Social post on October 21, Trump warned that U.S. allies in the Middle East “would welcome the opportunity, at my request, to go into Gaza with a heavy force and ‘straighten out Hamas’ if Hamas continues to act badly, in violation of their agreement with us.” Vice President Vance echoed this sentiment, warning, “If Hamas doesn't comply with the deal, very bad things are going to happen.” Trump later told reporters that any violations would be “handled toughly, but properly,” adding, “I don’t believe it was the leadership, they had some rebellion in there amongst themselves and they killed some people. If they keep doing it, we’re going to go in and straighten it out,” while clarifying that U.S. troops would not be directly involved.
As the international community watches closely, the United Nations is pressing ahead with a 60-day plan to restore aid to Gaza. U.N. Humanitarian Aid Chief Tom Fletcher described the process as a “massive task,” with bulldozers and equipment clearing roads to facilitate the flow of supplies. On October 22, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel must allow the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) to provide humanitarian assistance in Gaza, despite Israel’s earlier ban on the agency amid allegations of Hamas infiltration—allegations UNRWA has strongly denied.
Looking ahead, the question of Gaza’s future governance and security remains unresolved. Netanyahu acknowledged that “ideas for ‘the day after’ and future of Gaza—such as how the territory will be governed—had been discussed,” but admitted, “It’s not going to be easy, but I think it’s possible. We’re really creating a peace plan and an infrastructure here where nothing existed even a week and a day ago. That’s going to require a lot of work. It requires a lot of ingenuity.”
For now, the ceasefire, however tenuous, offers a glimmer of hope in a region long defined by conflict. But as both the Trump plan and the realities on the ground make clear, the path to a just and durable peace will require not only bold diplomacy but also a reckoning with the deep wounds and inequities that still divide Israelis and Palestinians.