Gaza between Trump's plan and Netanyahu's conditions: What possibilities are on the horizon...?

The meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu concluded on Monday, September 29, with a press conference that reshuffled the cards once again, sparking widespread debate about the future of the war in Gaza and the "next day" plan.

Despite Trump's efforts to project optimism, the details of the meeting revealed that Netanyahu laid out his conditions in full, placing Hamas in a difficult and strict equation: either accept, or the battlefield remains open for more bloodshed and destruction.

The plan, some details of which were leaked through Israeli Channel 12, included: a permanent ceasefire, the release of all prisoners, a gradual withdrawal of Israel from the Gaza Strip, the formation of a new administration that does not include Hamas, Arab funding for this administration, and the deployment of an Arab security force to oversee stability.

Trump also added his commitment to not allow Israel to annex parts of the West Bank, a clause that some Arab leaders considered a positive step if intentions are genuine.

However, the press conference with Netanyahu revealed the depth of the disparity. The latter confirmed that any plan cannot proceed without the complete disarmament of Hamas and ensuring its exclusion from any governance or authority framework, which makes the gap between the U.S. proposal and the Israeli stance wide, and makes the implementation of the plan contingent upon Hamas accepting its political and military self-dissolution, which is unrealistic.

Therefore, on the Palestinian side, Hamas is expected to reject this framework entirely, as it cannot politically or publicly accept handing over Gaza to a new administration under regional supervision while it considers itself the head of the resistance.

The Palestinian Authority may also find itself in an unenviable position, caught between the temptation to return to Gaza through the "next day" and the fear of falling into the trap of U.S.-Israeli arrangements that could strip it of its true and desired role, due to Netanyahu's unfeasible and illogical conditions.

In light of this increasingly complex scenario, several main possibilities emerge:

The first possibility: the plan fails due to Hamas's rejection, and the war continues at an escalating pace that serves Netanyahu's political goals.

The second possibility: Arab-American pressures are exerted to convince Hamas to accept a long-term truce in exchange for an indirect or limited role, which is a fragile option that could quickly unravel.

The third possibility: the war continues until Gaza is exhausted, then new realities are imposed by force, which seems closer to Netanyahu's approach that bets on time and weaponry to impose his conditions.

In conclusion, Trump's plan appears, at this moment, to be a loose rhetorical framework rather than a feasible project. It is an attempt to portray the United States as a serious mediator, but it collides with the reality of occupation and Netanyahu's extreme conditions, as well as complex internal Palestinian and regional balances.

No plan can succeed if it is based on excluding a key party from the equation, namely the Palestinian side, or on imposing dictates through military force that are closer to surrender by Hamas.

It is also important to note the recent meeting held in New York, which included U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and envoy Witkoff with the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Egypt, and Jordan, where the Arab ministers emphasized the need to immediately stop the aggression, prevent the annexation of the West Bank or changes to the status quo at Al-Aqsa Mosque, and ensure the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza. This Arab stance, if solidified and developed, could be the way out of the impasse, the only brake on Netanyahu's military momentum, and the most important opportunity to restore a minimum of political balance at this critical stage.