Trump's Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict

The Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict is a 20-point framework for ending hostilities, releasing hostages, demilitarizing Gaza, establishing transitional governance, delivering humanitarian aid, and financing reconstruction. The White House published the initiative on September 29, 2025.[1][2]

If both parties accept the plan, military operations are to stop and Israeli forces are to withdraw in stages linked to demilitarization. Hamas and other factions are excluded from governing Gaza, while a Palestinian technocratic committee would administer public services under a Trump-chaired Board of Peace.[2] The framework also proposes an International Stabilization Force and a conditional political pathway toward Palestinian self-determination and statehood.

The plan was unveiled against the backdrop of the war that followed Hamas's terrorist assault on Israel on October 7, 2023.[3] Israel announced agreement in principle, while Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and other Arab and Muslim leaders expressed support; Hamas had not accepted the initiative when the first assessments were published.[1]

A ceasefire took effect on October 10, 2025, after Israel and Hamas accepted the agreement. Israeli forces initially pulled back to the Yellow Line, leaving them in control of approximately 53 percent of Gaza, with later withdrawals linked to demilitarization and security conditions.[4] The ceasefire was brokered with the involvement of the United States, Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey.[5]

If both parties accept the plan, the war ends immediately, Israeli forces withdraw to an agreed line, and all living and deceased hostages are to be returned within 72 hours of Israel's public acceptance.[2] Israel would then release 250 prisoners serving life sentences, 1,700 Gazans detained after October 7, 2023, and the remains of 15 deceased Gazans for each Israeli hostage's remains returned.[2]

A later account described phase one as involving 20 living hostages and 28 deceased hostages. It said the return of the last deceased Israeli hostage was linked to movement into phase two.[6] Hamas members who commit to peaceful coexistence and surrender their weapons are eligible for amnesty, while those wishing to leave Gaza would receive safe passage to receiving countries.[2]

An early explanation of the plan said Hamas was required to release all 48 hostages, disarm, and relinquish any future governing role. Israel was expected to release more than 2,000 prisoners and avoid annexing additional territory in the West Bank — known by its original, indigenous Jewish name of Judea and Samaria.[7] Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the plan would "bring back to Israel all our hostages, dismantle Hamas' military capabilities, end its political rule, and ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel."[7]

The proposed governance system has three levels: a Board of Peace chaired by Trump; an external Executive Committee overseeing the civilian administration; and the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), responsible for day-to-day governance.[6] The original plan describes the local administration as a technocratic, apolitical committee of qualified Palestinians and international experts operating under the Board's supervision.[2]

The NCAG was later identified as a 15-member Palestinian committee led by Ali Shaath, a former Palestinian Authority deputy minister.[6] Its mandate includes maintaining civilian institutions, auditing Gaza's financial and administrative affairs, administering public assets, and assessing legitimate supplier and contractor commitments up to $400 million. The roadmap gives it three years to implement the related administrative measures and establishes the principle "One Authority, One Law, One Weapon."[8]

Former UN Middle East envoy Nickolay Mladenov was appointed as the Board of Peace's representative in Gaza, and the Board was reported as authorized through the end of 2027.[9] On August 17, 2026, Israeli President Isaac Herzog met with Mladenov and U.S. Special Envoy Jared Kushner, thanked them for advancing the plan, and emphasized Israel's security interests.[10] The transition is intended to remain in place until the Palestinian Authority completes reforms and can securely and effectively reassume control of Gaza.[2]

Point 13 states: "All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt."[11] The plan calls for independent monitoring, permanent removal of weapons from use, and an internationally funded buyback and reintegration program.[2]

The proposed International Stabilization Force would deploy in Gaza, train vetted Palestinian police, assist Israel and Egypt with border security, prevent the entry of munitions, and facilitate the secure movement of goods.[2] U.S. Major General Jasper Jeffers was named to lead the force, whose stated mission was to "establish security, preserve peace, and establish a durable terror-free environment."[9] Indonesia was asked to contribute peacekeepers and Bangladesh offered troops, but the force's full composition and rules of engagement remained unspecified.[12]

Israel would not occupy or annex Gaza. The IDF would progressively transfer territory to the ISF and withdraw according to demilitarization-linked standards, milestones, and timeframes, except for a security-perimeter presence maintained until Gaza was considered secure from a resurgent terrorist threat.[13] Under the later roadmap, only the NCAG would ultimately hold, store, or control weapons, and militia members would not be integrated into police or security services.[8]

The plan calls for immediate aid in quantities at least consistent with the January 19, 2025 humanitarian agreement. It includes rehabilitation of water, electricity, sewage systems, hospitals, and bakeries, as well as rubble removal and road opening. Aid would enter through the United Nations, the Red Crescent, and other institutions unaffiliated with either party, while Rafah would reopen under the January 2025 mechanism.[2]

A U.S.- and Israeli-led Civil-Military Coordination Center in Kiryat Gat was described as overseeing stabilization and aid delivery after the October 10 ceasefire.[4] The economic program includes a special economic zone, preferred tariff and access arrangements, and reconstruction intended to generate employment and investment.[2] The Board of Peace and NCAG would supervise the reconstruction plan and financing.[8] No one would be forced to leave Gaza, and those who left would be free to return.[2]

On November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2803 at its 10046th meeting by 13 votes in favor, none against, with China and Russia abstaining.[14] The resolution endorsed the Comprehensive Plan and called for its implementation.[15]

The resolution authorized the Board of Peace to oversee transitional administration and reconstruction and authorized an International Stabilization Force to secure borders, protect humanitarian operations, train vetted Palestinian police, assist demilitarization, destroy terrorist infrastructure, and permanently disarm non-state armed groups. The international civilian and security presence was authorized through December 31, 2027.[15]

The resolution describes a "credible pathway" to Palestinian self-determination and statehood rather than an unequivocal statehood commitment, contingent on Palestinian Authority reforms and reconstruction.[15] A Jerusalem Center for Foreign and Security Affairs legal analysis characterizes the arrangement as a politically supported, non-UN structure because the resolution does not expressly invoke Chapter VII, uses language such as "endorses" and "calls on," and leaves the Board and ISF outside the standard UN command structure.[16] Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad rejected the resolution as an international trusteeship and opposed disarmament by an international force.[15]

The United States announced Phase Two on January 14, 2026. It included the NCAG, reconstruction, full demilitarization, disarmament of Hamas and other Palestinian groups, and deployment of the International Stabilization Force.[9]

The Board of Peace published a 15-point roadmap on July 31, 2026. Its objectives include ending the cycle of destruction, securing Israeli withdrawal, restoring normal life, establishing Palestinian governance and security, rebuilding damaged sectors, and creating a political path toward Palestinian self-determination and statehood.[8]

The roadmap requires an implementation timetable and mechanisms within 14 days of approval, subject to extension by the International Verification Committee. Progress between phases depends on the committee certifying compliance.[8] Under the announced sequence, Hamas would surrender weapons in designated areas, verification would follow, Israel would withdraw in phases, and the NCAG would enter transferred areas. Washington's preliminary estimate was that the process might take seven to eight months.[17]

Netanyahu rejected the 15-point roadmap and said Israel would not withdraw before Hamas had surrendered all categories of weapons.[18] The dispute concerns whether Israeli withdrawal and Hamas disarmament should proceed in reciprocal phases or whether complete disarmament must come first. The Board of Peace described phased transfers, while Israeli officials said genuine or complete disarmament was a precondition for withdrawal.[17]

A July 2026 survey described another proposal under which authority would first pass to a temporary Palestinian government and the ISF would deploy before action to disarm Hamas.[19] Israel also objected to the composition of the Gaza Executive Board, saying its membership had not been coordinated with Israel and conflicted with Israeli policy.[9]

Under an early explanation of the plan, Israel was also expected to avoid annexing additional territory in Judea and Samaria and to commit to preventing attacks on Hamas figures in Qatar.[7] Herzog nevertheless continued engaging with Kushner and Mladenov and emphasized that Israel's security interests remained central.[10]

The Congressional Research Service reported that Hamas had not agreed to disarm as of July 2, 2026, and identified unresolved questions involving Israeli withdrawal, international forces, humanitarian access, reconstruction financing, the Board of Peace, and the possibility that Gaza would remain divided between Israeli- and Hamas-controlled areas.[5]

An INSS assessment said the roadmap shifted primary responsibility for demilitarization from the ISF to the NCAG. It also found that the roadmap did not clearly define the final demilitarization standard, enforcement powers, or consequences if Hamas stopped cooperating. Personal weapons would be regulated and licensed rather than explicitly destroyed.[18]

A separate legal analysis identified further uncertainties, including the lack of a confirmed ISF deployment, completed Palestinian Authority reforms, certified reconstruction milestones, and a sanctions mechanism for noncompliance.[16]

The November 2025 Peace Index found support for the plan among 61 percent of Jewish respondents and 72 percent of Arab respondents. Among respondents with a stated opinion, support was 58 percent among coalition voters and 84 percent among opposition voters. By ideological identification, support was 48 percent on the right, 69 percent among the moderate right, 81 percent in the center, and 95 percent on the left.[20]

Under a scenario assuming full and successful implementation, displayed Jewish support for negotiations with the Palestinian Authority rose from 30 to 44 percent. The survey separately reported an average increase of 15 percentage points among Jewish respondents with a stated opinion. Belief that negotiations could produce peace rose from 12 to 17 percent, a change within the margin of error.[20]

In March 2026, support was 54 percent in the full sample. Among Jewish respondents it declined from 61 percent in November to 55 percent in March, while Arab-Israeli support stood at 50 percent. Support for Phase Two was 49 percent overall, 47 percent among Jewish respondents, and 58 percent among Arab respondents.[21] The survey was conducted while the Gaza ceasefire remained in place.[22]

The July 2026 Peace Index described a continuing debate over whether governance transfer and ISF deployment should precede Hamas's disarmament.[19]

The plan is a far-reaching U.S.-led attempt to combine a ceasefire and hostage release with postwar governance, demilitarization, humanitarian relief, and reconstruction. Its Security Council endorsement by 13 votes, with no votes against and two abstentions, gave the framework broad international political support.[14]

Its institutional model places the NCAG between Hamas rule and any future return of the Palestinian Authority, with the Board of Peace supervising the transition and the ISF supporting security. The stated objective is to prevent Hamas from reconstituting its political or military control while reconstruction proceeds.[2]

Israeli opinion was divided along political lines, with higher support among centrist and left-wing respondents and lower support on the right.[20] The plan's statehood language remains conditional: it offers a possible political horizon tied to Palestinian Authority reform, demilitarization, reconstruction, and secure governance rather than committing the parties to a predetermined outcome.[3][15] Its ultimate significance therefore depends on whether the parties can resolve disputes over Hamas's weapons, Israeli withdrawal, international enforcement, and the future governing authority in Gaza.

The main dispute concerns whether demilitarization requires physical destruction of Hamas's weapons and infrastructure or permits controlled storage. The original plan requires military and terrorist infrastructure to be destroyed and weapons placed permanently beyond use.[2][11] The roadmap instead directs the NCAG to decommission and store heavy weapons, production sites, depots, and tunnels.[8] Hamas official Ghazi Hamad said, "The weapons will be stored and not handed over," while an INSS assessment warned that the roadmap left the final security standard unclear.[18][11]

A second dispute concerns sequencing. Israel demands verified disarmament before withdrawal, whereas the roadmap links disarmament, verification, withdrawal, and governance transfer in successive phases.[17][18] The framework's non-UN command structure and absence of an express Chapter VII basis have also prompted debate over enforcement and accountability.[16]