A recent meeting between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sparked debate, with some analysts suggesting Netanyahu may have successfully redefined the second phase of the Gaza agreement, potentially undermining the original US plan.
Despite reports suggesting Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court, had agreed to move forward with the second phase despite disagreements on implementation, Trump’s public statements painted a different picture.
In a press conference, Trump stated that certain countries had joined the agreement after Hamas pledged to disarm. He further claimed these unnamed nations would dismantle the group if it failed to comply. This declaration has been interpreted by some as a significant departure from the initial agreement.
Dr. Ibrahim Fraihat, a professor of international conflict, described Trump’s stance as a complete “overturn” of the agreement. Trump emphasized the limited time Hamas had to surrender its weapons, warning of severe consequences for non-compliance.
According to Fraihat, the meeting’s outcome was “far less than zero” because Netanyahu had seemingly persuaded Trump to adopt his own definition of the second phase. Trump’s remarks omitted previous discussions of an international stabilization force and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, instead prioritizing Hamas’s disarmament as the core element of the next phase.
Fraihat suggests the situation has entered a state of uncertainty. Trump’s focus on an international force disarming Hamas indicates Netanyahu may have convinced him to assign this task to an alternative entity acting on Israel’s behalf. Notably, Trump did not address the humanitarian situation or reconstruction efforts in Gaza.
Resolving this impasse requires regional mediators involved in the agreement to persuade Trump to adopt a revised approach that balances disarmament with humanitarian concerns and reconstruction. However, according to Fraihat, achieving this balance in the near future appears unlikely.
