Vague and undefined: Experts agree that these are the best descriptions of the ceasefire plan that the US government has shepherded into reality in Gaza by pressuring both Hamas and Israel.
Some observers — including the primary mediators — say this vagueness was deliberate and, in fact, necessary in order to get the opponents, the militant Gaza-based group and the , to agree to anything at all. Others argue that the vague definitions mean there’s too much left to negotiate and the lack of clarity could lead to renewed fighting.
“The fact that Israel and Hamas have agreed on a first phase of a ceasefire plan is an important first step,” Hugh Lovatt, a senior policy fellow with the Middle East and North Africa program at the European Council on Foreign Relations, or ECFR, told DW in a statement. “However, it is too early to speak of peace and there are still significant issues and concerns that will need to be addressed. … The key to a successful ceasefire is whether the plans can really be implemented and both sides keep their part of the deal.”
Questions on issues such as demilitarization in , the proposed “international stabilization force,” international guarantees and the Israeli government’s long-term intentions are all still being debated, Lovatt said.
Will Israel fully withdraw?
Gaza is 41 kilometers (25.5 miles) long and 10 kilometers wide, and, after two years of conflict, the Israeli army said it controlled most of the coastal enclave.
The peace agreement sponsored by US President says Israel would not control or annex Gaza, and that Israeli troops should withdraw if Israeli hostages are freed. Reports say Israeli troops have partially withdrawn over the past few days, and the remaining living hostages were released on Monday.
The initial military withdrawal is only up to what is being called “the yellow line,” a boundary within Gaza. At the yellow line, the Israeli military still controls about half of the Strip.
According to the peace agreement, the Israeli military will move back further after other conditions are fulfilled. They’ll go to a “red line” once an ” international stabilization force” has been deployed. Then, once Gaza is under the control of a new transitional authority, they’ll pull back even further. No timeline has been given in the peace agreement, so it is unclear when all that would happen.
That final withdrawal would see Israeli troops move back to policing the buffer zone between Israel and Gaza that has been there since the early 21st century. Israel argues that such a buffer zone is necessary for its security and has expanded it over two decades.
The buffer used to be 300 meters (1,000 feet) from the border, but, in the January 2025 ceasefire agreement, the zone was defined as “at a depth of 700 to 1,100 meters into Gaza,” the not-for-profit Israeli organization Gisha, which advocates for Palestinian freedom of movement, reported in March.
That’s about 17% of the Gaza Strip and would also mean the permanent destruction of communities and no access to agricultural land, according to Gisha.
Who is the ‘international stabilization force’?
Point 15 of the peace plan states that the United States will cooperate with Arab and international partners to deploy an “international stabilization force,” or ISF, in Gaza.
This force would work with Israel and Egypt to secure Gaza’s borders and should also train and support a new police force.
But experts at the Washington-based think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, wrote late last week: “The creation of an international stabilization force of Arab and global partners also faces high hurdles. Unless there is clear buy-in from Palestinian elements on the ground (to include Hamas, which opposes the idea), it is hard to imagine any Arab forces willing to deploy on the ground.”
A French Foreign Ministry spokesperson told journalists that the country was ready to contribute to an ISF; Germany has said it would provide funds for aid but not personnel for such a force.
Egypt has floated the idea of including US troops. At that has gathered diplomats and heads of government to discuss the ceasefire, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty told US broadcaster CNN: “We need American boots on the ground.”
About 200 US soldiers have already arrived in Israel to help set up a “civil-military coordination center.” Reports suggest that they won’t enter Gaza.
What is the future of Hamas?
Media report that Hamas is already taking back control of security in the Gaza Strip. are reportedly battling rival groups inside Gaza, some of which allegedly committed crimes such as looting aid, and some of which have been supported by Israel.
On the plane to Israel, Trump told reporters that his government had actually given Hamas “approval for a period of time” to do this in order to avoid larger social problems in the devastated territory.
The peace agreement talks about the complete “demilitarization of Gaza” but is short on details. Observers have pointed out that there are no specific benchmarks about what demilitarization should look like, or any timeframe for this. That gives both Israel and Hamas options to stall. For example, the ECFR’s Lovatt said, Israel could avoid withdrawing to the red line until there’s “complete demilitarization,” but nobody really knows what that looks like.
“Even if Hamas’ leadership accepts Israel’s demand [for disarmament], many of its fighters would likely refuse to hand over their weapons and could defect to more hardline groups,” Lovatt wrote in an analysis earlier this month.
Other observers note that Hamas is much more than just a fighting group. It is also a political party with an ideology based on resisting Israeli occupation of the and is likely to continue to exist as a political force.
The peace plan references and self-determination. But again there are no real details on how this could happen, and neutralizing Hamas’ ideology “will require a greater Israeli commitment to withdraw from Gaza and engage in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations,” Lovatt said.
Who ensures adherence to the peace plan?
Most observers agree that, because the 20-point plan is so short on details, somebody has to take on the role of making it more concrete.
“To appease his right flank and ensure his own political survival, Netanyahu might be tempted to resume the war on Hamas once the hostages are freed,” experts from two think tanks, International Crisis Group and the CSIS, wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine last week. “To truly break this dynamic, the US will need to apply continuous pressure on Israel.”
But, as Emile Hokayem, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, argued in UK newspaper the Financial Times this week, “the plan could flounder if the US gets tired or distracted, or if it once again becomes enthralled to Israeli hardliners.”
Edited by: Carla Bleiker
The post Questions remain on Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan appeared first on Deutsche Welle.
