(MENAFN) Donald Trump’s rapid visit to Israel and Egypt allowed him to publicly claim credit for the Gaza ceasefire and hostage exchange deal, showcasing a moment of personal triumph. During speeches in Jerusalem and Sharm el-Sheikh, Trump emphasized his role in achieving the agreement, portraying it as a historic turning point.

While Trump’s involvement was pivotal—particularly in pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept terms previously rejected—the deal itself is limited in scope. It covers only a ceasefire and the exchange of hostages for prisoners, not a broader peace process.

The next stage of Trump’s proposed 20-point plan envisions the Gaza Strip being demilitarized and governed by a Palestinian-inclusive committee reporting to a “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump. However, detailed implementation remains uncertain, and the agreement does not constitute a roadmap to comprehensive Middle East peace.

Observers note that the ceasefire is more a pragmatic resolution of conflict than a lasting settlement. Political will for a full peace deal is absent, and the Gaza conflict resembles historical wars ending through exhausted compromise rather than total victory.

Tensions surrounding the agreement also highlighted Trump’s prioritization of US interests over Israel’s, exemplified by his criticism of Netanyahu’s missile strike on Qatar, which risked destabilizing a key US ally and military base in the region. Trump’s approach contrasts with that of President Joe Biden, who has shown greater willingness to support Israel even at potential cost to US regional interests.

In summary, while Trump’s intervention was decisive in halting immediate hostilities and facilitating a hostage exchange, it does not provide a framework for long-term peace in Gaza or the wider Middle East.

MENAFN15102025000045017640ID1110199612