NextFin News - The Trump administration has officially initiated the second phase of its comprehensive Gaza peace plan, a high-stakes diplomatic maneuver aimed at fundamentally altering the security landscape of the Middle East. Following the endorsement of UN Security Council Resolution 2803 in November, U.S. President Trump announced that the focus has shifted from the initial cease-fire and hostage exchanges to the more arduous tasks of disarmament, reconstruction, and the eventual withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). According to Foreign Affairs, this phase mandates the creation of the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), a body of 15 Palestinian technocrats tasked with governing the enclave under the oversight of a newly formed "Board of Peace."
The current geopolitical reality on the ground remains fractured. Israel maintains control over the "Green Zone," comprising roughly 53 percent of Gaza’s territory, while Hamas retains its grip on the "Red Zone," which houses over 95 percent of the population. Although Hamas formally agreed in October to hand over administrative duties to technocrats, the group’s leadership has remained elusive regarding the surrender of its military wing. U.S. President Trump, speaking at a televised cabinet meeting in January, expressed optimism that Hamas would disarm, citing a lack of viable alternatives for the group. However, senior Hamas official Moussa Abu Marzouk countered this narrative in late January, stating that the group had never discussed the surrender of weapons, highlighting a significant gap between Washington’s expectations and the reality of militant resistance.
The success of this transition depends almost entirely on the ability of the United States to mobilize regional powers—specifically Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey—to exert maximum pressure on Hamas. These three nations, all members of the Board of Peace, possess unique levers of influence. Egypt controls the Rafah crossing, Gaza’s primary gateway to the world; Qatar provides financial support and sanctuary to Hamas’s political leadership; and Turkey offers diplomatic legitimacy. According to The Jakarta Post, U.S. President Trump has made it clear that these nations are expected to deliver concrete progress on disarmament or risk a cooling of their bilateral relations with Washington. The strategy involves a combination of threats, such as the expulsion of Hamas leaders from Doha, and incentives, including buy-back programs for weapons and amnesty for those who comply.
From a strategic perspective, the disarmament of Hamas is the non-negotiable prerequisite for Israeli withdrawal and the commencement of large-scale reconstruction. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces intense domestic pressure to maintain a security buffer in Gaza. He has signaled that any withdrawal prior to the total dismantling of Hamas’s offensive infrastructure—including its vast tunnel network—would be a political non-starter. The Trump administration is attempting to bridge this gap by proposing a phased approach: as heavy weapons are decommissioned, Israel would be required to pull back its forces in corresponding stages. This "leverage-for-compliance" model seeks to create a self-reinforcing cycle of de-escalation, but it remains vulnerable to spoilers on both sides.
The economic dimension of the plan is equally critical. Major regional investors, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have conditioned their participation in Gaza’s multi-billion-dollar reconstruction on the establishment of a stable, non-militant governing authority. They are unwilling to fund infrastructure that could be destroyed in a future conflict or diverted for military use. By linking reconstruction funds directly to disarmament, the Board of Peace is attempting to use economic necessity as a tool for political transformation. If the NCAG can demonstrate effective governance in the Red Zone, it may undermine Hamas’s popular support, but this requires the International Stabilization Force (ISF) to provide a credible security alternative to the militants.
Looking ahead, the next six months will be a decisive period for the Trump administration’s Middle East policy. Israeli officials have privately indicated that March 2026 serves as a "decision point"; if voluntary disarmament has not begun by then, the likelihood of renewed military action increases significantly. U.S. President Trump has already demonstrated a willingness to use heavy-handed diplomacy, such as overriding Netanyahu’s objections to include Qatari and Turkish officials on the Board of Peace. However, the ultimate test will be whether the regional powers can translate their influence into a verifiable decommissioning of Hamas’s arsenal. Without a breakthrough in the Red Zone, the vision of a unified, reconstructed Gaza will remain a distant aspiration, and the territory risks falling back into a cycle of perpetual occupation and conflict.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
