By Dr Mohd Safar Hasim, Malaysian Press Institute (MPI)
Introduction: When Peace Becomes a Power Play
In the volatile theatre of Middle Eastern diplomacy, peace plans often arrive dressed in the language of humanitarian relief but carry the weight of geopolitical ambition.
The recently unveiled 20-point Gaza Peace Framework—announced jointly by U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on September 29, 2025—is a striking example.
Marketed as a bold solution to end the Gaza war, the plan promises ceasefire, hostage exchange, infrastructure rebuilding, and economic revitalization.
Yet beneath its humanitarian veneer lies a deeper contest over who controls Gaza’s future, who governs its people, and who defines peace.
This commentary explores the framework not merely as a roadmap to ceasefire, but as a strategic power play with implications for Palestinian sovereignty, regional diplomacy, and Malaysia’s longstanding commitment to humanitarian ethics. It also examines how youth civic education can help Malaysians critically engage with global peace narratives, and why ASEAN norms offer a more inclusive alternative to unilateral designs.
The Framework: Sequencing Relief, Restructuring Power
The Trump-Netanyahu plan is built around five interlocking pillars:
Ceasefire and Hostage Exchange
The framework proposes an immediate cessation of hostilities, contingent on mutual agreement.
Within 72 hours of Israel’s acceptance, all hostages—both living and deceased—would be returned.
In exchange, Israel would release 250 life-sentence prisoners and 1,700 Gazans detained since October 7, 2023. For each deceased Israeli hostage, the remains of 15 Gazans would be returned.
This sequencing reflects a transactional logic aimed at restoring trust and de-escalating violence.
Hamas Disarmament and Amnesty
Hamas is required to disarm and renounce governance. Members who commit to peaceful coexistence are offered amnesty, while those wishing to leave Gaza are granted safe passage to third countries. This provision removes Hamas from the political equation, positioning the group as a security threat rather than a stakeholder in peace.
Humanitarian Aid and Reconstruction
Aid distribution would resume immediately, matching January 2025 benchmarks. Infrastructure rehabilitation—including water, electricity, hospitals, and bakeries—would be prioritized.
Distribution would be managed by neutral international bodies such as the UN and Red Crescent, bypassing local factions and minimising politicisation.
Transitional Governance and Oversight
Gaza would be governed by a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee. Oversight would be provided by an international “Board of Peace” chaired by Donald Trump, with former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and other global figures participating. The long-term goal is to reform the Palestinian Authority (PA) to eventually retake control of Gaza.
Economic Development and Security
Gaza is envisioned as a “deradicalised terror-free zone” with preferential market access and international investment. A special economic zone would be created, and a stabilization force would train vetted Palestinian police. This approach blends security guarantees with neoliberal development incentives.
Malaysia’s Diplomatic Ethos: Peace with Dignity
Malaysia’s foreign policy on Palestine is rooted in three enduring principles:
Self-Determination
Malaysia has consistently supported the right of Palestinians to choose their own leaders and determine their political future. Excluding Hamas—regardless of its controversial role—undermines this principle and risks alienating significant segments of the Palestinian population (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malaysia, 2023).
Multilateralism and Neutrality
Malaysia favours peace processes brokered through neutral, inclusive platforms such as the United Nations or the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The Trump-led “Board of Peace” lacks multilateral legitimacy and may be perceived as politically biased, especially given Trump’s prior policy alignment with Israeli interests.
Humanitarian Diplomacy
Malaysia’s humanitarian engagement emphasizes neutrality, Islamic solidarity, and regional consensus. Aid must be unconditional and not contingent on political restructuring. The framework’s sequencing—linking aid to Hamas’s exclusion—risks politicising humanitarian relief and undermining trust.
Malaysia’s position is echoed by ASEAN norms, which prioritise consensus, non-interference, and regional ownership. The framework’s unilateral design and foreign-led governance model diverge sharply from these principles.
Comparative Lens: How This Framework Differs
When compared to earlier multi-country proposals, the Trump-Netanyahu framework reveals stark contrasts in governance, inclusion, and oversight.
The Saudi-French proposal of 2024 envisioned a reformed Palestinian Authority leading Gaza’s administration, supported by a joint Arab-European committee. This model emphasised regional legitimacy and gradual reintegration of Palestinian institutions. \
In contrast, the Trump framework bypasses the PA entirely, installing a technocratic committee under the supervision of a foreign-led board chaired by Trump.
Such centralisation of authority in a single figure—especially one with prior partisan alignment—raises concerns about neutrality and continuity.
Similarly, the Blair-Kushner regional draft proposed a transitional trusteeship model involving multiple regional actors, with Tony Blair playing a facilitative role rather than a directive one. That model emphasised gradual reintegration of Palestinian governance structures and economic
development led by private sector partnerships.
The Trump-Netanyahu plan, however, envisions Gaza as a “deradicalised terror-free zone” with a special economic corridor, prioritising security and market access over political reconciliation.
Crucially, the Trump framework excludes Hamas entirely from future governance, whereas both the Saudi-French and Blair-Kushner drafts allowed for conditional inclusion or marginalization without outright banning.
Malaysia’s diplomatic ethos, grounded in reconciliation and multilateralism, would likely view such exclusion as counterproductive to long-term peace.
On humanitarian aid, the Trump plan aligns with international norms by channelling relief through the UN and Red Crescent. Yet Malaysia and ASEAN may prefer a more regionally anchored mechanism, involving the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) or ASEAN-led humanitarian coalitions to ensure cultural sensitivity and regional trust.
In sum, while the Trump-Netanyahu framework offers a sequenced and pragmatic roadmap, its unilateral architecture and exclusionary politics contrast sharply with Malaysia’s preference for inclusive, multilateral, and regionally stewarded peacebuilding.
The new peace plan for Gaza was announced by the U.S. and Israel. It offers help—but only if Hamas steps down. Gaza would be run by experts, with global leaders watching.
Malaysia says peace must include all voices. We support help, but not control.
Why it matters: Peace is more than silence. It’s justice, dignity, and choice.
Youth civic education should encourage questions such as:
* Who decides peace?
* Can aid be just if it excludes voices?
* What role should Malaysia play in global humanitarian diplomacy?
These questions foster critical thinking and align with Malaysia’s commitment to ethical international engagement.
Stewardship, Not Spectatorship
The Trump-Netanyahu Gaza Peace Framework offers a structured path to ceasefire and reconstruction. Its sequencing of hostage exchange, aid restoration, and technocratic governance reflects a pragmatic approach to conflict resolution. However, its exclusion of Hamas, foreign-led oversight, and lack of multilateral legitimacy raise serious concerns.
Malaysia must continue championing inclusive peace, regional stewardship, and ethical diplomacy.
The framework may offer short-term relief, but without Palestinian representation and regional ownership, it risks becoming a redesign rather than a resolution.
As a steward of humanitarian diplomacy, Malaysia should advocate for:
* A UN or OIC-led transitional mechanism.
* Inclusive Palestinian representation, including reconciliation efforts.
* Aid mechanisms rooted in neutrality and dignity.
* Youth civic education that connects global issues to local values.
In the words of former Malaysian Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, “Peace without justice is tyranny.”
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in steering Malaysia’s role therefore is not merely to observe but to shape a peace that honours dignity.
(The views expressed here are entirely those of the writer)
WE