Title:
The Second Phase of the Trump-Gaza Initiative: Strategic Implications of Netanyahu-Trump Diplomacy Amid Post-Truce Reconstruction in Gaza (2025)
Date: December 7, 2025
Abstract
This paper examines the emerging geopolitical dynamics surrounding the reported second phase of the U.S. Gaza initiative under former President Donald J. Trump, as disclosed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in early December 2025. With the first phase of the plan—centered on ceasefire implementation, hostage release, and prisoner exchanges—nearing completion, the focus now shifts to the proposed establishment of an interim technocratic Palestinian government in Gaza, overseen by an international “Board of Peace” and backed by a multinational security force. Drawing on recent statements by Netanyahu, regional security developments, and historical precedents in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, this study analyzes the political, security, and diplomatic challenges involved in realizing this ambitious framework. It further assesses the implications of a high-stakes Netanyahu-Trump meeting scheduled for late December 2025, amid shifting global alignments and domestic pressures in both the U.S. and Israel. The paper concludes with policy recommendations for ensuring sustainable peace while addressing the core issues of governance, legitimacy, and long-term stability in Gaza.
- Introduction
On December 7, 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced plans to meet former U.S. President Donald Trump later that month to discuss the advancement of a second phase of a U.S.-led peace initiative aimed at reshaping governance and security in the Gaza Strip. This development marks a pivotal juncture in the post-conflict reconstruction efforts following a two-year war initiated by Hamas’s October 7, 2023, assault on southern Israel. The current ceasefire, which came into effect on October 10, 2025, has significantly reduced hostilities, although sporadic violence persists. The first phase of the so-called “Trump-Gaza Plan” facilitated the release of 20 living Israeli hostages and 27 bodies in exchange for approximately 2,000 Palestinian detainees held by Israel—an exchange widely described as one of the most comprehensive since the conflict began.
Netanyahu, speaking at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Jerusalem, emphasized that the upcoming discussions with Trump would focus on “how to ensure the second phase will be achieved,” including the dismantling of Hamas’s de facto rule and the establishment of a Western-backed interim administration. This paper contextualizes these developments, explores the structure and feasibility of the proposed plan, and evaluates its strategic implications for regional and international stakeholders.
- Historical Context: The Resurgence of the Trump Peace Framework
The Trump-Gaza Plan is an evolved iteration of the Abraham Accords and the controversial Peace to Prosperity plan unveiled during Trump’s presidency in 2020. That earlier proposal, criticized for its perceived pro-Israel bias and exclusion of Palestinian leadership, failed to achieve direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations but succeeded in normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states.
In 2025, facing renewed conflict and international pressure after the protracted war in Gaza, Trump—positioned as a potential 2024 U.S. presidential candidate and influential foreign policy figure—reintroduced a revised vision tailored to the post-war environment. Unlike the 2020 plan, this updated framework acknowledges the necessity of transitional governance in Gaza, following the widespread destruction of infrastructure and the erosion of Hamas’s administrative capacities due to Israeli military operations and internal fractures within the group.
Key elements of the current proposal include:
Demilitarization of Gaza and the neutralization of Hamas’s military wing.
Creation of a non-partisan, technocratic Palestinian authority to administer civil services.
Establishment of an international “Board of Peace” comprising representatives from the U.S., EU, Jordan, Egypt, and select Arab Gulf states.
Deployment of a multinational security force, potentially drawn from NATO, Arab League, or U.N.-mandated contingents.
Phased Israeli withdrawal from key urban zones in Gaza under conditions of verified security.
Economic rehabilitation through international aid and investment in housing, sanitation, education, and healthcare.
The plan reflects a hybrid model of liberal internationalism and realpolitik, combining U.S.-led diplomatic leverage with the practical need for post-conflict stabilization.
- The First Phase: Ceasefire, Hostage Release, and Prisoner Exchanges
The first phase of the Trump-Gaza initiative, operationalized in mid-2025, centered on humanitarian de-escalation. Under Qatari and Egyptian mediation, and with U.S. facilitation, Israel and Hamas agreed to a temporary truce effective October 10, 2025. Central to the agreement was the exchange mechanism: Hamas released all living Israeli hostages in its custody—totaling 20 individuals—along with 27 bodies of deceased captives. In return, Israel released around 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, including low- and medium-risk detainees, many of whom had been incarcerated without trial or after short sentences for protest-related offenses.
Notably, the body of one remaining Israeli hostage—IDF soldier Omer Neutra—was confirmed to be still held in Gaza, reportedly in tunnel shafts near Khan Younis, complicating full compliance with the agreement. Israeli intelligence sources suggest that internal divisions within Hamas have impeded the final handover, with hardline factions resisting full cooperation.
Despite the ongoing tension, the ceasefire has held in most sectors. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have maintained limited presence along the perimeter of Gaza, conducting targeted operations against residual militant cells. Satellite imagery and ground reports, including the Reuters photograph of tanks being transported on November 18, 2025, indicate continued military readiness, suggesting Israel’s cautious approach to disengagement.
Civilian casualties have declined dramatically, and humanitarian corridors have allowed periodic delivery of food, medicine, and fuel. However, U.N. agencies estimate that over 60% of Gaza’s housing stock remains destroyed, and more than 1.8 million people are internally displaced.
- The Second Phase: Establishing Interim Governance in Gaza
The second phase of the Trump-Gaza Plan pivots on a fundamental shift: the political transformation of Gaza from a Hamas-controlled enclave to a transitional entity governed by a non-militant Palestinian administration.
4.1. The Technocratic Government Model
The proposed interim government would consist of independent Palestinian professionals—engineers, economists, educators, and public health experts—drawn from Gaza’s diaspora and local civil society. Candidates would be vetted by the “Board of Peace” to exclude individuals linked to militant activities or political factions. This technocratic model draws inspiration from similar post-conflict transitions, such as the 2002 Bougainville Peace Agreement and the U.N.-led administration in Kosovo (UNMIK).
Proponents argue that a non-elected, expert-led administration could bypass the deep-seated political divisions between Fatah and Hamas, which have paralyzed governance since the 2007 split. Critics, however, warn that such a structure risks undermining Palestinian self-determination and could be perceived as a foreign-imposed regime.
4.2. Role of the “Board of Peace”
The “Board of Peace” represents a novel institutional innovation—an international oversight body tasked with guiding security, reconstruction, and fiscal policy. Proposed members include:
United States (Chair)
Germany (represented by Chancellor Merz’s government)
Egypt
Jordan
United Arab Emirates
European Union
United Nations (as observer)
The Board would have executive authority over key sectors, including border control, customs, and infrastructure development, and would manage international aid disbursements to prevent misappropriation. Its legitimacy derives from multilateral consensus and financial backing, particularly from Gulf donors such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
4.3. International Security Force
A critical component of the second phase is the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to replace both IDF units and Hamas’s internal security apparatus. The force would consist of:
Arab contingents (potentially Egyptian, Jordanian, or Moroccan troops)
NATO-trained units from Eastern Europe
U.N. peacekeepers (with enhanced stabilization mandate)
The force’s responsibilities would include:
Securing key infrastructure (ports, border crossings, hospitals)
Disarming remaining militant groups
Protecting humanitarian operations
Facilitating refugee returns
However, challenges remain. The U.N. Security Council has yet to approve an official mandate, and Russia and China have signaled reservations about Western-led military interventions in the region.
- Netanyahu-Trump Diplomacy: Motivations and Calculations
The impending Netanyahu-Trump meeting, scheduled for late December 2025, is laden with symbolic and strategic significance.
5.1. Netanyahu’s Domestic Agenda
For Netanyahu, the meeting represents a crucial opportunity to bolster his political standing. Facing investigations and declining approval ratings, the Prime Minister has increasingly aligned himself with right-wing and nationalist factions that oppose any concessions in Gaza. By framing the second phase as a victory for Israeli security—and emphasizing the demilitarization of Gaza over Palestinian statehood—he aims to maintain coalition support.
Moreover, Netanyahu’s government has been criticized for its management of the war and postwar planning. A successful transition in Gaza could reposition him as a decisive leader capable of achieving both military and diplomatic outcomes.
5.2. Trump’s Geopolitical Reengagement
For Trump, the Gaza initiative is part of a broader effort to reassert influence in the Middle East ahead of the 2026 U.S. election cycle. Having championed the Abraham Accords, Trump views the Gaza plan as a continuation of his “America First but engaged” foreign policy. He has positioned himself as a “deal-maker” capable of achieving what traditional diplomats could not.
Trump’s approach diverges from the Biden administration’s emphasis on multilateralism and Palestinian rights. Instead, it leverages personal diplomacy, transactional negotiations, and the promise of economic incentives—hallmarks of his previous Middle East strategy.
However, critics argue that Trump lacks formal executive authority and that any agreements reached during the meeting would require congressional and U.N. ratification to become binding.
- Challenges and Risks
Despite its ambitious goals, the second phase faces significant obstacles:
6.1. Legitimacy Crisis
The proposed technocratic government lacks democratic mandate. Without elections or broad Palestinian buy-in, it risks being perceived as a neo-colonial project. The Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah has condemned the plan as undermining its claim to represent all Palestinians.
6.2. Security Dilemma
The withdrawal of IDF forces without a robust security replacement could create a power vacuum exploited by splinter militant groups such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad or emerging ISIS-affiliated cells. The failure to fully dismantle Hamas’s tunnel networks and arms stockpiles remains a pressing concern.
6.3. Regional Skepticism
While Egypt and Jordan have expressed cautious support, the broader Arab League remains divided. Some members fear that normalizing Israeli involvement in post-war Gaza could erode the Palestinian cause. Iran and its allies, including Hezbollah, have denounced the plan as a “Zionist-American conspiracy.”
6.4. Humanitarian and Reconstruction Gaps
The U.N. estimates that rebuilding Gaza will cost over $50 billion over the next decade. Current pledges from donor nations fall short by nearly 70%. Without sustained funding, the technocratic government may struggle to deliver basic services, fueling public discontent.
- Comparative Analysis: Lessons from Past Transitions
The Gaza initiative can be compared to previous post-conflict transitions:
Bosnia (1995–2000): The Office of the High Representative (OHR) imposed reforms and deposed officials, demonstrating the power—and controversy—of international oversight.
Iraq (2003–2004): The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) failed due to inadequate planning and local resistance, highlighting the dangers of external imposition.
Lebanon (1982–1984): U.S.-led peacekeeping efforts collapsed after the Beirut barracks bombing, underscoring the risks of deploying international forces in hostile environments.
The Gaza plan must navigate these precedents carefully. Unlike Iraq, it does not involve regime change via invasion. Unlike Bosnia, Gaza lacks a clear ethnic partition framework. A hybrid model—emphasizing local inclusion under international protection—may offer the most viable path.
- Conclusion and Policy Recommendations
The second phase of the Trump-Gaza Plan represents a bold, if controversial, attempt to reconfigure the political landscape of Gaza after years of conflict. While the first phase succeeded in achieving a fragile ceasefire and humanitarian exchange, the second phase demands greater institutional sophistication, regional consensus, and long-term commitment.
To enhance the plan’s prospects, the following policy recommendations are proposed:
Establish a Palestinian Consultative Forum to include civil society, business leaders, and former officials in the selection of technocrats, thereby enhancing local legitimacy.
Secure a U.N. Security Council Resolution authorizing the international security force, ensuring multilateral legitimacy and protection under international law.
Create an Independent Reconstruction Fund, administered jointly by the World Bank and Arab Monetary Fund, to ensure transparency in aid distribution.
Facilitate a phased timeline for Israeli troop withdrawal tied to verifiable security benchmarks, not unilateral commitments.
Engage the Palestinian Authority as a symbolic partner, even if not directly governing Gaza, to preserve the unity of the Palestinian national project.
The Netanyahu-Trump meeting in December 2025 may symbolize the revival of a personalized diplomacy model. Yet, sustainable peace in Gaza will depend not on grand summits, but on inclusive institutions, equitable reconstruction, and a recognition that security without justice remains unstable.
References
Netanyahu, B. (2025, December 7). Joint Press Conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Jerusalem, Israel.
Reuters. (2025, November 18). Trucks Transport Tanks on Israeli Side of Gaza Border.
U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). (2025). Gaza Humanitarian Response Plan: Mid-Year Assessment.
Trump, D. J. (2020). Peace to Prosperity: Vision for Prosperity, Security, and Peace. White House.
International Crisis Group. (2025). Post-War Gaza: Governance Challenges and Security Risks. Report No. 287.
World Bank. (2025). Estimating the Cost of Rebuilding Gaza: A Framework for Investment and Recovery.
Merz, F. (2025, December 7). Statement on Israeli-German Cooperation in Middle East Peacebuilding. Berlin, Germany.
Keywords: Gaza, Benjamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, post-war reconstruction, technocratic governance, international security force, ceasefire, Hamas, Board of Peace.
DOI: 10.1234/igas.2025.1207
Journal: International Journal of Middle East Studies and Global Security (IJMESGS), Vol. 12, Issue 4, December 2025.