Trump's Gaza Plan Highlights the Need for Deeper Solutions

posted on: Oct 1, 2025

By: Ghassan Rubeiz / Arab America Contributing Writer

The Trump administration’s 21-point plan for Gaza represents the US’s latest attempt at rushed crisis management. The plan calls for the immediate return of the hostages and exchange of prisoners; a ceasefire; peacekeeping by an unspecified multinational force; a gradual Israeli withdrawal; the disarming of Hamas and a Palestinian committee for civil governance. Israel would be in charge of security for an unspecified period. In the short term, these measures could provide much-needed relief at a time of unbearable crisis.

But the plan lacks a timetable and concrete benchmarks, and avoids basic questions: What about Palestinian self-determination? What about the West Bank? How far is Israel willing to withdraw from Gaza? The plan also hinges on questionable assumptions: Hamas’s readiness to surrender, Netanyahu’s goodwill, and international enforcement with teeth. There is too much room for trust and too little space for verification. On both sides of the conflict, the Trump plan is already being interpreted to suit private wishes: Arabs see a horizon for Palestinian statehood, and Israel sees a green light for continued dominance and comfort in an open-ended occupation.  

Partial peace agreements in the Middle East have historically been politically easier to achieve than comprehensive ones. Yet after decades of temporary arrangements, both Israelis and Palestinians find themselves in increasingly precarious positions. The status quo provides neither security nor peace, while military operations continue to generate civilian casualties and international condemnation. Both traditional “one-state” and “two-state” frameworks have lost credibility, even among the parties to the dispute. Meanwhile, Israel’s strategy has historically relied on unwavering US support, weak Arab states, poor Palestinian leadership, and international silence.

But these pillars are weakening. American support is rapidly eroding, particularly among younger Americans. Critics of Israel within MAGA circles appear to be gaining momentum. Regional dynamics are changing as well. Palestinian leadership is evolving, especially among women and young people. Global awareness of Palestinian rights is growing, including among progressive Jewish communities. Many nations have recognized Palestinian statehood amid anger over Israel’s conduct in Gaza.

The Case for a Binational Framework

The failure of incremental approaches points toward a more fundamental reimagining. Theoretically, a single-state, two-nation scenario could serve as a comprehensive solution.  A binational solution would encompass both populations and guarantee:

• Constitutional protections for both national groups;
• Cultural and religious autonomy;
• Integrated security arrangements within a regional framework;
• Distinct geographic areas preserving cultural practices;
• A common border and army.

Such a bold solution needs a champion, and the American Jewish community is uniquely positioned to advocate effectively for it. American Jews tend to be politically liberal, as self-confident participants in a pluralistic and diverse democracy. Their genuine love for Israel entails the courage to challenge policies that threaten its long-term survival. And the Jewish experience of centuries-long persecution has engendered a natural love for justice that has brought untold benefits to American civil society and might yet save Israel from itself.

After decades of trauma, both Israeli and Palestinian societies need positive experiences of shared living to rebuild trust. With international support, by working together, both communities could develop stronger democratic institutions and bridge internal divisions that have proven impossible to resolve in isolation. By supporting a framework ensuring dignity and security for both peoples, American Jewish leadership could help Israel fulfill its highest aspirations while creating a model of coexistence for the region. No solution is risk-free, but the binational path, at this point, may be the best way forward.

Back to the Trump plan, I hope that in a year or two the Palestinians and the entire world would not look at this plan as merely an extension of the disappointing Oslo Accords or the controversial Abraham Accords. Despite the shady political record of Netanyahu, the impulsiveness of Trump, the aggression of Israeli settlers, the explosive anger of the Palestinians, and the avarice of Arab elites, we can only hope and pray for the unexpected good to dominate the final outcome after the guns are silent in Gaza.

Ghassan Rubeiz is the former Middle East Secretary of the World Council of Churches. Earlier, he taught psychology and social work in his country of birth, Lebanon, and later in the United States, where he currently lives. He has contributed to political commentary for the past twenty years and delivered occasional public talks on peace, justice, and interfaith subjects. You can reach him at rubeizg@gmail.com

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab America. The reproduction of this article is permissible with proper credit to Arab America and the author.

Want more articles like this? Sign up for our e-newsletter!

Check our blog here!