President Donald Trump recently held a summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, aimed at addressing the ongoing conflict in Gaza. While he announced a ceasefire-for-hostages agreement, the absence of several key leaders raised questions about the viability of his proposed 20-point peace plan. Notably, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed were not present, signaling potential complications for any future peace initiatives.
The summit’s optics were overshadowed by these absences, as neither the Saudi crown prince nor the Emirati leader sent high-ranking officials to represent them. Their absence suggests a lack of commitment to the summit’s outcomes, particularly concerning the reconstruction of Gaza, which relies heavily on financial support from these nations. Moreover, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was present but not featured prominently, underscoring the disconnect between Trump’s declarations and the realities on the ground.
Trump’s declaration that peace had come to the Middle East after “3,000 years” was met with skepticism by observers. While the return of 20 Israeli hostages and the resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza were significant steps, the missing leaders highlighted the challenges ahead. The summit appeared more focused on celebrating Trump’s role than on fostering genuine peace.
The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity, issued following the summit, lacked concrete details, filled instead with general statements about dignity and cooperation. Observers noted that without substantial engagement from Netanyahu, the Gulf Arab states, and the Palestinians, the peace process is unlikely to progress. Netanyahu’s reluctance to share the stage with Abbas reflects ongoing tensions regarding the Palestinian Authority’s role in negotiations.
In the context of the summit, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan indicated he would not participate if Abbas were present, illustrating the geopolitical complexities at play. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have expressed dissatisfaction with changes made to the peace plan after Israel’s late interference, which weakened the original proposals for reconstruction and governance in Gaza.
Initial plans included an Arab-led international force to oversee the West Bank, eventually transitioning to a reformed Palestinian Authority-led body. However, the final 20-point plan leaves many questions unanswered, particularly regarding who will oversee daily governance in Gaza and how the international Board of Peace will function. The choice of “technocrats” to lead Gaza’s administration remains unclear, raising concerns about legitimacy among the Palestinian population.
The absence of essential leaders at the summit sends a clear message that the proposed peace plan requires significant revisions. The involvement of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Turkey is critical for any future negotiations, particularly in pressuring Hamas to disarm and ensuring that Palestinian civil society is included in discussions.
Current political dynamics indicate that neither Saudi Arabia nor the UAE is willing to support a process that could lead to further destruction in Gaza or endorse a permanent Israeli occupation of the West Bank. Their reluctance reflects a broader concern about becoming entangled in a cycle of rebuilding only to face new conflicts.
While Trump’s achievement in securing a ceasefire is noteworthy, his vision for peace appears overly ambitious without a collaborative approach. The significant absence of key leaders at the summit emphasizes the challenges that lie ahead for any peace initiatives in the region. To realize a sustainable resolution, a more inclusive and realistic strategy is essential, one that acknowledges the political realities and aspirations of all parties involved.
