False Peace Coming: The Hidden Dangers In Trump’s 21 Point Gaza Roadmap

On the sideline of the U.N. General Assembly this month, Trump and his special envoy Steve Witkoff shared a preliminary version of the 21-point framework with key Arab and Muslim nations. Trump has spoken optimistically of its reception -- he told reporters that "intense negotiations have been going on for four days and will continue as long as necessary" and claimed he has received a "very good response" from Israel and Arab leaders. 

Netanyahu has engaged cautiously, affirming that the release of hostages and dismantling of Hamas must be top priorities, but expressing deep reservations over any role for the Palestinian Authority in Gaza or "giving a terror state" to Palestinians near Jerusalem. 

 

At the U.N., Netanyahu delivered a stirring address denouncing the concept of "recognizing Palestinian statehood near Jerusalem" as tantamount to giving Al Qaeda a foothold near New York City -- "sheer madness," he said. 

That metaphor -- comparing a post-October 7 Palestinian state to Al Qaeda obtaining a state within striking distance of New York -- captures the core Israel concern: what assurances can one truly offer that a new Palestinian regime will not morph back into a terror conduit? Netanyahu argued that to grant statehood to Palestinians so close to Jerusalem now is like allowing 9/11 terrorists not only to survive, but to govern. 

Israel stands at the edge of history. Once again, the world demands that she compromise her security for the sake of illusions, offering promises of peace that have no firm foundation. Ironically, President Trump--one of Israel's most vocal friends and defenders--is leading the push for this plan, making it even harder for Israel to reject. 

Advisors like Steve Witkoff and others likely shaped its contours, but Trump views it as another opportunity to secure lasting peace. Yet hope must be tempered by reality: the plan, while well-intentioned, risks ignoring the deep-rooted conflicts and mistrust that have fueled generations of violence. Without addressing these underlying issues, any temporary gains will be fleeting, leaving Israel to shoulder the consequences of a peace built more on optimism than on strategy.

The most dangerous thread running through this plan is the proposal to lay the groundwork for a Palestinian state once Gaza is "redeveloped" and the Palestinian Authority is "reformed." That is political fantasy. Every attempt to create a two-state solution has collapsed because Palestinian leadership rejects Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. 

Handing Palestinians sovereignty in Gaza -- one mile from Jerusalem -- would not bring coexistence. It would create a terror base within striking distance of Israel's heartland.  While the US has been the one of the few nations to stand against recognizing a 'Palestinian State", this plan signals that even the U.S. may eventually pressure Israel to contravene Scripture and divide the land promised to her.

Below is a direct rebuttal to the dangerous ideas embedded in this new "vision." These 21 counterpoints expose the flaws and highlight what must truly be done if Israel is to survive in a world determined to erase her.

Without an ironclad enforcement mechanism, this is wishful thinking. Every ceasefire promise in the past has been broken by Hamas or Islamic Jihad. Moreover, "terror-free" cannot be verified without permanent Israeli boots on the ground or at minimum full intelligence oversight. Otherwise, this clause simply resets the clock to the next war.

Reconstruction sounds noble, but international aid has been repeatedly funneled into weapons stockpiles and tunnels. Redevelopment without direct Israeli auditing authority risks fueling another military buildup. Worse, the international community often prioritizes symbolic projects over security realities, creating photo-ops while ignoring Israel's safety.

This clause effectively saves Hamas from destruction by freezing the war in its favor. Without complete disarmament first, withdrawal simply hands Hamas time and space to rebuild. It conditions Israel's retreat on promises rather than performance -- a suicidal sequencing.

This timeline is unrealistic and unenforceable. Hamas thrives on delay tactics and psychological warfare. If Israel halts fire in blind trust, Hamas can manipulate the situation while regaining strategic initiative underground.

This is mass amnesty for terrorists. It rewards violence, dishonors Israeli victims, and guarantees that released killers will return to the battlefield. Trading hostages for criminals creates perverse incentives for future kidnappings.

Terrorists declaring "peaceful coexistence" on paper means nothing. Amnesty without prosecution ensures impunity. Even worse, this legitimizes Hamas as a political partner instead of prosecuting them as war criminals.

Unmonitored aid equals renewed terror tunnels. Israel must control every truck, every dollar, every ton of cement. Anything less is national suicide.

Both organizations have long histories of bias and complicity in Palestinian propaganda. Excluding Israeli oversight not only weakens accountability but effectively sidelines the very nation that has most at stake.

This opens the door for Hamas sympathizers disguised as "technocrats." International bodies are notoriously ineffective at vetting such figures. Worse, the plan signals eventual Palestinian Authority involvement -- a direct violation of Israel's red lines.

Economic stimulus does not neutralize jihadist ideology. Billions have already been poured into Gaza with little to show beyond rockets and martyrdom culture. Without ideological reform, investment is throwing good money after bad.

A low-tariff zone in Gaza risks becoming a hub for smuggling and dual-use goods. If Egypt and Israel don't control this zone, it becomes a black market feeding Hamas's war machine.

This forecloses Israel's ability to establish defensive buffer zones. It also ignores the potential for Jewish resettlement in Gaza -- something that could fundamentally alter the security balance. Meanwhile, the right of return remains a lurking demand behind such language.

Without full Israeli inspection powers, this is fantasy. Hamas can govern through proxies and keep underground networks alive. Paper promises of exclusion are meaningless.

No Arab partner has the will or ability to risk its own stability for Israel's security. Guarantees from Egypt, Jordan, or Saudi Arabia are only as good as the next political crisis.

This would create another "Lebanon scenario" -- weak international peacekeepers unable to confront terrorists, and a Palestinian "police" force that eventually turns its guns on Israel.

This clause strips Israel of a legitimate strategic option. Annexation may, in fact, be the only way to permanently eliminate terror infrastructure and assert lasting sovereignty. Forcing Israel to renounce this option undermines deterrence.

Why annexation could be the wiser path: Israel once withdrew from Gaza in the name of peace, only to be repaid with rockets, tunnels, and massacres. Annexation -- with full military control and Jewish resettlement -- would prevent Gaza from being a perpetual terror incubator. It would restore Israeli sovereignty, deter foreign meddling, and create defensive depth around Israel's heartland. History has shown that vacuums in Gaza breed jihad; only permanent Israeli presence can break the cycle.

This allows for partial concessions even if Hamas remains defiant. Israel could be forced to retreat from secure zones while Hamas remains operational elsewhere. This rewards Hamas for rejecting peace.

Qatar is a key Hamas funder and propaganda hub. To forbid Israel from striking Hamas assets there ties Israel's hands and grants Qatar immunity as a terror sponsor.

"Dialogue" without accountability is empty rhetoric. Radical imams will hijack the process, and children will continue to be indoctrinated in martyrdom culture. Israel must demand education reform, not vague interfaith slogans.

This is the poisoned seed in the plan. Every concession pushes Israel closer to forced recognition of a terror state. Conditioning peace on eventual statehood is the oldest trap in the book.

Endless "dialogues" only serve Palestinian maximalist demands. Each round of talks chips away at Israel's legitimacy while rewarding Palestinian intransigence. Dialogue without recognition of Israel as the Jewish state is nothing but diplomatic theater.