Trump's Gaza Plan: Can It Work?

The question of post-conflict planning for Gaza has taken on new urgency as international attention turns to potential pathways for stability. Among those offering critical insights is Samer Sinjaliwi, a Palestinian activist whose background in Fatah provides a unique lens on the challenges ahead.

His perspective emerges at a pivotal moment when various proposals, including those associated with former U.S. President Donald Trump, are being examined for their potential to reshape the region's future. The discussion moves beyond immediate humanitarian concerns to address the fundamental political architecture required for lasting peace.

Samer Sinjaliwi brings a distinctive viewpoint to the conversation about Gaza's future. As both a Palestinian activist and a former member of Fatah, the long-dominant political party in Palestinian politics, his insights carry the weight of direct experience with the internal dynamics that shape Palestinian decision-making.

This background positions him to analyze peace proposals not just as an observer, but as someone who understands the intricate web of political relationships, historical grievances, and practical constraints that define the Palestinian position. His transition from political insider to activist suggests a perspective grounded in both institutional knowledge and grassroots concerns.

When examining any proposed solution for Gaza, Sinjaliwi's analysis necessarily considers:

• The legacy of past peace initiatives and their shortcomings
• Internal Palestinian political divisions and their impact on governance
• The balance between immediate humanitarian needs and long-term political solutions
• How external proposals are received and interpreted within Palestinian society

Any discussion about Gaza's future must grapple with the territory's complex reality. The Gaza Strip represents one of the most densely populated areas in the world, with a population that has endured multiple conflicts, a long-standing blockade, and severe economic restrictions.

The challenges are multifaceted: infrastructure has been repeatedly damaged and rebuilt, unemployment rates remain critically high, and access to essential services like clean water and healthcare is severely limited. Beyond these immediate humanitarian concerns lies the deeper political question of governance and the relationship between Gaza and the West Bank.

For any peace plan to be viable, it must address:

• Security arrangements that satisfy all parties while respecting Palestinian sovereignty
• Economic development pathways that can provide sustainable livelihoods
• Political reconciliation between competing Palestinian factions
• International guarantees and monitoring mechanisms

The Trump administration's approach to the region, which included the Abraham Accords and proposals that were rejected by Palestinian leadership, continues to influence how new initiatives are evaluated.

According to Sinjaliwi's analysis, post-Gaza planning requires moving beyond traditional frameworks that have failed to produce lasting results. He suggests that any workable solution must be rooted in a realistic assessment of what can actually be achieved, rather than idealistic visions that ignore ground realities.

What it will actually take for peace to be possible

This pragmatic approach implies several key considerations. First, any plan must have buy-in from the Palestinian population it purports to help, which means addressing their core concerns rather than imposing external solutions. Second, the political fragmentation between Gaza and the West Bank cannot be ignored—any Gaza-specific plan must have a clear relationship to broader Palestinian political aspirations.

Third, the role of regional actors and international powers must be carefully calibrated. Too much external control undermines Palestinian agency, while too little engagement risks leaving Gaza in a perpetual state of crisis. The ideal balance involves:

• International support for reconstruction and development
• Clear timelines and benchmarks for progress
• Respect for Palestinian political processes and institutions
• Security arrangements that protect all parties

When evaluating whether Trump's Gaza plan or any similar proposal can work, Sinjaliwi's perspective suggests that success depends less on the specifics of the plan itself and more on the implementation framework. History has shown that even well-designed peace initiatives can fail if they don't account for local political realities and stakeholder buy-in.

The Palestinian political landscape is not monolithic. Fatah, Hamas, and other factions have different visions for Gaza's future, and any plan that doesn't navigate these internal divisions is likely to face significant resistance. Moreover, the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict context means that Gaza-specific solutions cannot be entirely isolated from the overall peace process.

Key questions that any proposal must answer include:

• How does this plan align with Palestinian self-determination?
• What role will existing Palestinian institutions play?
• How are security concerns balanced with humanitarian needs?
• What happens if key parties don't comply with the agreement?

The feasibility of any plan ultimately rests on its ability to create a sustainable political and economic order that Palestinians can embrace as their own.

The question of whether Trump's Gaza plan or any similar initiative can work doesn't have a simple answer. As Samer Sinjaliwi's perspective illustrates, the path forward requires acknowledging the deep complexities that have thwarted previous peace efforts.

Success will depend on creating a framework that is both ambitious enough to address Gaza's profound challenges and realistic enough to be implemented. This means moving beyond grand declarations to focus on practical steps that build trust and demonstrate tangible benefits for ordinary Palestinians.

Ultimately, the most important factor may be the degree to which any plan is owned by the Palestinian people themselves. External proposals, no matter how well-intentioned, will only succeed if they align with Palestinian aspirations and are implemented through Palestinian-led processes.

The conversation sparked by Sinjaliwi's analysis serves as a reminder that sustainable peace requires more than just a plan—it demands sustained commitment, genuine partnership, and a willingness to learn from past failures.