Who Shapes Palestine's Future? Aid, Oversight, and the Old Western Hand

What does Tony Blair have at stake in Gaza? The former UK Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party is remembered for his notorious role in the 2003 Iraq war, supporting the US invasion of the country which resulted in more than 200,000 civilian deaths, as per the Iraq Body Count Project. The Chilcot Report of 2016 established the sheer manipulation that went into justifying this invasion. The UK, under Blair, exaggerated claims that Iraq had possession of WMDs, and chose not to consider peaceful options for disarmament before launching a war. There was no clarity about what the post-war Iraq would, or should, look like. Tony Blair, famously promised his support to George W. Bush by writing “I will be with you, whatever.” 

So, why is Blair, whose political stint is defined by dangerous errors, a part of the proposed “Board of Peace”, headed by Donald Trump, for Gaza’s governance and redevelopment? This is only one in the long array of questions that Trump’s 20-point plan for peace in the region begs. 

Trump's 20-Point Gaza Peace Plan for Co-Existence

1. “De-radicalisation” of terror, such that it does not “pose threats” to neighbouring countries
2. Redevelopment of Gaza for the ‘benefit’ of its people
3. “Immediate end to war upon agreement” to the terms and a line of demarcation by both sides
   1. Israel to withdraw forces from the line of demarcation, suspend all military operations
   2. Staged withdrawal to follow, until which the battle lines will remain frozen
4. Release of all hostages within 72 hours of Israel accepting the agreement
5. Hostage release to be followed by Israel’s release of life sentence prisoners (250 in number) and Palestinian civilians (1700), including women and children detained after October 7, 2023. Israel to release remains of 15 Palestinians for every one Israeli hostage remain that is released
6. Amnesty to be guaranteed to Hamas members who, post the hostage release, promise “peaceful co-existence” and “decommission their weapons”. Those who wish to leave Gaza will be provided safe passage to “receiving countries”
7. If the agreement is accepted, “full aid will be sent to the Gaza Strip”, in accordance with the quantities last mentioned on January 19, 2025. This is to include humanitarian aid, including rehabilitation of infrastructure (water, electricity, sewage), rehabilitation of hospitals and bakeries, and entry of necessary equipment to remove rubble and open roads
8. Entry and distribution of aid in the Gaza Strip to be facilitated by the UN (and its agencies), Red Crescent, and other international institutions not associated with either of the two parties, and without their interference. Rafah crossing to be opened in accordance with the mechanism mentioned in the January 19, 2025 agreement.
9. Gaza will be temporarily governed by a “technocratic and apolitical Palestinian committee”, supported by “international experts”, to manage daily services. Oversight will rest with a new international body, the “Board of Peace”, chaired by Donald J. Trump and joined by global leaders such as Tony Blair. This body will fund and guide Gaza’s redevelopment until the Palestinian Authority completes its “reform program” and is ready to reassume control, drawing on “international standards” to ensure effective governance and attract investment.
10. A “Trump economic development plan” to convene experts behind successful Middle Eastern “modern miracle cities” to design a redevelopment strategy. Existing international proposals will be integrated into a secure governance framework to attract investment, create jobs, and bring lasting opportunity to Gaza.
11. Special Economic Zone with preferred tariff and access rates, negotiated with participating countries
12. No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. Opportunity to stay and “build a better Gaza” to be offered.
13. Hamas and other factions will play “no role in Gaza’s governance”. All military and terror infrastructure will be dismantled, with weapons decommissioned under independent international monitoring, supported by buyback and reintegration programs. “New Gaza” will instead focus on economic growth and peaceful coexistence with its neighbors
14. Regional partners to guarantee that Hamas and its factions comply with the obligations of the agreement and that “New Gaza” does not pose threats to its people or neighbours
15. The U.S., with Arab and international partners, will establish a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) to support vetted Palestinian police in Gaza. Working with Jordan, Egypt, and Israel, the ISF will secure borders, prevent arms smuggling, and ensure safe trade flows, while serving as the foundation for Gaza’s long-term security
16. Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza. As the ISF establishes stability, the IDF will gradually withdraw under agreed milestones tied to demilitarization. Territory will be handed over to the ISF and transitional authority, with only a limited security perimeter maintained until Gaza is fully secure from terror threats
17. If Hamas delays or rejects the proposal, the above points will proceed in the “terror-free areas” handed over from IDF to the ISF
18. “Inter-faith dialogues process” based on values of “tolerance and peaceful co-existence” to try and “change mindsets and narratives of Palestinians and Israelis” by emphasizing the benefits that can be derived from peace
19. As the re-development and PA reform advances, the “conditions…for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood”, which is recognised as the aspiration of Palestinian people, will be deemed to be in place
20. USA to establish a dialogue between Israel and Palestinians to agree on political horizon for “peaceful and prosperous co-existence”

Issues in Donald Trump's Gaza Peace Plan

Let’s start with language. For the majority of the proposal, mention of ‘Palestine’ is avoided, only to surface towards the end, following several conditionalities. Self-determination and statehood is anchored on the ‘redevelopment’ of the region and ‘reform’ of the Palestinian Authority. Statehood is recognised as an aspiration, but if the qualification for the same is to be defined by how the West sees redevelopment — and in Trump’s era, this can be all the more reliant on the amoebic gulps of  real estate — the setup is bound to fail. The proposal also deliberately tries to reduce the conflict to that between faiths, sidelining ethnicity, and perhaps even fuelling the larger climate of Islamophobia. Why else would it emphasise the “inter-faith” nature of dialogue for peaceful co-existence. 

Next is the orientalist attitude of governance made evident in the proposal. The question of who gets to rule Palestine is answered by and is in favour of the West. The technocratic committee is given an “apolitical” quality, almost as if to declare that they are pragmatic and can thus devise the best models of development for Gaza and its people — the ‘benefit’ that one of the earlier points in the proposal introduces. If an ‘external’ body is permitted to take the final call in decisions concerning Palestinians — and their aspirations for their homeland — how representative can these policies even be? It is this committee, organised amongst foreign political elites, that manages and determines the release of reconstruction funds. Couple this with the establishment of ISF by the ‘partners’ to further the alienation that Palestinian people are subjected to on a daily basis. 

Edward Said had, in the wake of the Oslo Accords, pointed out how the deal reduced the relevance of the ‘minimum basic rights’ that the ‘colonised Palestinian people’ could claim, and thus, chiseled away the goals of both freedom and self-determination. The West-East dynamic has often rested on the former’s tendency to infantilise the latter. And the newly proposed deal is no different, imagining a “New” Gaza that will accommodate Western interests, because on its own, it cannot be 'competent'. The responsibility of keeping “New” Gaza within the prescribed limits and off Hamas’ reach falls on the neighbours. 

The proposal also seeks to establish a Special Economic Zone in the region, the characteristics of which, including tariffs, will be negotiated by all participating countries. This, in essence, opens up the Palestinian region for business. It’s not too long ago that a Riviera was being mooted with confidence by Donald Trump. The callousness with which mass targeted murders can be eclipsed by coordinated investment that caters to luxury is bewildering, to say the least. The Special Economic Zone, that has on paper replaced Trump’s excitement for a Riviera, gets the skeptical eye for this very reason. The American President has also gone a step ahead with personalisation by calling the emergent blueprint the “Trump economic development plan”. If it succeeds, it’ll be the crown jewel on his self-proclaimed path to a Nobel Peace Prize. 

Peace must, with urgency, be ushered in for the people of Palestine. But Donald Trump & Co. should realise that no ‘Board of Peace’ or Economic Development Plan can succeed without acknowledging Palestinian sovereignty from the get-go. This may also be the right time for those countries that have recognised the state of Palestine — mainly in protest of Israeli stubbornness in pushing a genocide and avoiding ceasefires — to make sure this recognition is followed by an active campaign for a free Palestine, and a lasting Middle East peace.