Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s ambitious Middle East peace proposal known as the “Peace to Prosperity” proposal sought to resolve one of the longest and most contentious conflicts in modern history: Israeli-Palestinian. Unveiled in January 2020, it promised economic incentives for Palestinians while promising increased security and recognition for Israel – but has met significant resistance due to tough choices faced by both entities involved.
Trump’s proposal centered around the notion of a two-state solution, including provisions for an independent Palestinian state whose exact parameters remained highly contentious. His plan suggested dividing West Bank territory between Israel and Palestinian control zones with Jerusalem remaining Israel’s undivided capital city; Palestinians were promised substantial investments in infrastructure development and business opportunities to help ensure their people could prosper into the future.
However, the plan met immediate and strong opposition from Palestinian leaders who saw it as strongly biased towards Israel. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejected it outright as being part of a conspiracy that denied Palestinians their rights to an independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital; Hamas (the militant group controlling Gaza) voiced strong objection to it as an effort to undermine Palestinian rights and aspirations.
The difficulty lies in the deeply entrenched political dynamics on both sides of the conflict. Israel, long vulnerable to attacks from Gaza, was wary of any plan which might compromise its security; at the same time, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saw Trump’s proposal as a chance to cement his political standing by securing additional territorial gains in West Bank territory and win political points with right-wing supporters who favor Israeli sovereignty over certain strategic areas.
Hamas faces its own set of dilemmas. Since seizing control of Gaza in 2007, it has been in an ideological and military struggle with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority, rejecting any form of peace agreement which recognizes Israel’s legitimacy for more confrontational approaches that make any progress difficult to attain, especially without Hamas participation in negotiations.
Situation exacerbated by fragmented Palestinian politics
Trump’s peace plan remains stuck due to its regional context. While some Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, normalized their relations with Israel under the Abraham Accords in 2020, others such as Saudi Arabia remain wary about fully adopting it. Furthermore, this lack of consensus undermines its success potential; failing to address deeper historical and cultural grievances that fuel conflict.
Faced with these numerous obstacles, both Israel and Hamas find themselves at an impasse. Israel views any peace agreement through the lens of security concerns; any successful accord must not endanger their national security; while Hamas has prioritized ideological purity over compromise with Israel; yet with growing humanitarian crises due to blockades and conflict making its position increasingly hard for it to justify before Palestinian people.
Trump’s peace plan, while innovative in some respects, has failed to bridge the profound political, security, and ideological cleavages between Israel, Hamas, and broader Palestinian leadership. Until both parties can find common ground by making difficult choices–such as acknowledging each other’s right to exist or alleviating Gaza’s humanitarian crisis–any lasting peace will remain out of reach in this region. Moving forward for Gaza and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts likely require new approaches that focus on pragmatic yet inclusive solutions which take account of these realities on the ground.