Did Trump Compromise Israel’s Security for a Nobel Peace Prize?

Former President Donald Trump recently announced a Gaza peace plan, which has raised questions about its purpose and long-term impact. Many critics suggest that the plan was less about achieving lasting peace and more about creating an opportunity for Trump to win a Nobel Peace Prize, but the more important question is what Israel actually gained from the agreement. In reality, after years of conflict, Israel has gained almost nothing. The plan promised a temporary pause in fighting and the release of hostages, but it did not provide any permanent security guarantees, nor did it remove Hamas from power in Gaza. Israel also gained no land and no long-term strategic advantage. After Many Years of war and repeated sacrifices, Israel’s situation remains largely unchanged, facing the same threats across its border.

The plan included billions of dollars in investment for Gaza’s reconstruction, aiming to rebuild schools, hospitals, and infrastructure. While this appears beneficial on paper, the reality is that Hamas controls Gaza. Even if international authorities or technocrats are assigned to manage the funds, Hamas will likely retain influence over how resources are spent. This means that the investments could strengthen Hamas rather than weaken it, giving the organization the resources to reorganize and potentially resume attacks in the future.

A central question is who will take responsibility to ensure that Hamas does not attack Israel again. The plan mentions temporary international oversight and Palestinian technocrats to administer Gaza, but practical enforcement remains weak. If Hamas violates the agreement, the United States will not fight Hamas directly. The U.S. may provide weapons, intelligence, and political support to Israel, but it will not deploy its own troops. Trump did not sign a formal, binding treaty guaranteeing Israel’s protection; the best Israel can expect is political assurance that it has the U.S. backing to respond if Hamas attacks again. This means the responsibility for defense remains entirely with Israel, and if the group renews hostilities, Israel will have to confront it alone.

History shows that terrorist organizations rarely maintain long-term compliance with agreements. Hamas has repeatedly used ceasefires as opportunities to rebuild, then resumed attacks. Without strict enforcement and control over reconstruction funds and military capabilities, there is little reason to believe that this time would be different. If Hamas takes advantage of the plan, Israel may face renewed conflict within a few years. After decades of war, Israel has not gained any territory from Gaza and has not eliminated Hamas, leaving the cycle of conflict intact.

The Gaza peace plan provides no real long-term gain for Israel. While it temporarily pauses fighting and releases hostages, it does not remove the threat posed by Hamas, and the investments intended to rebuild Gaza may inadvertently strengthen the group. After many years of conflict, Israel has gained nothing in terms of land or permanent security, and the same risks remain. Critics argue that the plan reflects Trump’s interest in global recognition, including a Nobel Peace Prize, rather than a solution that ensures lasting peace. The responsibility for Israel’s security remains unchanged, and without strong enforcement, the cycle of violence may continue.