If there were a Nobel prize for trying to will things to become reality, Donald Trump would already be a shoo-in. Since September 29th, when he offered his plan for ending the Gaza war, both Israel and Hamas have said they accept the plan while rejecting key elements of it. Arab leaders are also keen to stress that the text Mr Trump presented was very different from the one he discussed with them five days earlier at the UN. Yet the American president has glossed over those differences: for now, he insists that “countries from all over the world” are on board with his proposal.
Envoys from Israel and Hamas will hope to narrow those gaps when they start indirect talks in Egypt on October 6th. Their goal is to agree on at least the first phase of the plan, which calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, the release of the 48 remaining Israeli hostages and 1,950 Palestinian prisoners, and a surge of humanitarian aid for the beleaguered territory. Then they will need to discuss the second half of Mr Trump’s proposal, which lays out a vision for how to govern and secure Gaza after the war.
That is easier said than done, though, and not only because there are differences between Israel and Hamas. There are also disputes between the Palestinians themselves, and the Palestinians and their Arab backers: they agree that the Trump plan cannot be implemented without changes, but they disagree on what those changes should look like.
Diplomats need to find language on disarmament that will satisfy both Israel and Hamas. If their proposal is too credible, Hamas may balk. If it is not credible enough, it risks imperilling other parts of the plan https://t.co/y8sh2wsiDW
— The Economist (@TheEconomist) October 6, 2025