ISLAMABAD: U.S. President Donald Trump has unveiled what he called a “historic” 20-point plan to end the Gaza war, laying out a roadmap for an immediate ceasefire, the release of hostages, and large-scale reconstruction under a new international body — the “Board of Peace” — chaired by himself and joined by former UK prime minister Tony Blair.

Flanked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, Trump billed the initiative as a potential turning point. Yet a close look at the press conference and the proposal reveals that, while sweeping in ambition, the plan leaves critical gaps.

Here’s a breakdown of what it promises — and five unanswered questions that may decide whether it takes hold or unravels.

Central to the plan is a temporary governance model: Gaza would be administered by a transitional committee of Palestinian and international technocrats, monitored and funded by a new international oversight body called the “Board of Peace”.

Mr Trump said the body would be chaired by himself and “put leaders from other countries on” it, naming former UK prime minister Sir Tony Blair as one confirmed member. Reuters+1

A technocratic interim authority — who runs Gaza day-to-day?

Under the plan, day-to-day administration would be handed to a transitional committee made up of qualified Palestinian and international experts until the Palestinian Authority (PA) is judged reformed enough to resume control.

The Board of Peace would set the framework, oversee funding, and coordinate reconstruction — effectively acting as Gaza’s guarantor during the transition. The White House document and media briefings stress that the arrangement is temporary and contingent on steps such as demilitarisation and reforms. Reuters+1

Tony Blair’s role: political heavyweight or administrator?

Sir Tony Blair — who served as the Quartet’s Middle East envoy and has led economic planning efforts for Palestine in the past — has publicly praised the proposal, calling it “bold and intelligent.”

According to the announcement, Blair would sit on the Board of Peace alongside Mr Trump and other international figures, helping to shape reconstruction priorities and political benchmarks for Gaza’s return to Palestinian civil rule.

His role, as described, is that of an elder statesman and coordinator rather than a day-to-day governor. The Independent+1

Who guarantees the deal — and is there regional buy-in?

The plan relies on international backing: the US would lead the Board of Peace, and reporting indicates regional partners — including Qatar and Egypt — have been involved in delivering and presenting the proposal to Hamas negotiators.

Media reports also reference a proposed trilateral coordination mechanism among the US, Israel and Qatar. But the exact legal or security guarantees — how international patrons would enforce disarmament, ensure funding or deter spoilers — are not fully spelled out in the released materials.

That omission leaves open who would act as an enforceable guarantor if commitments were breached. Politico+1

Has Hamas accepted the plan?

Hamas has not yet accepted the plan. Egyptian and Qatari mediators delivered the US proposal to Hamas negotiators, who said they were “reviewing the proposal positively and objectively,” according to one Egyptian media report — but public statements from Hamas have so far stopped short of endorsement, and the movement has historically rejected unconditional disarmament.

The US-Israeli announcement explicitly warned that a refusal would leave Israel with “full backing” to continue military options. AP News+1

What happens if Hamas refuses — and what are the risks?

Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu both framed the plan as a last-chance offer: accept and Gaza moves to international oversight with large-scale aid and reconstruction; reject and Israel would continue operations with US support. Critics and analysts warn that a deal written without the buy-in of the armed party risks prolonged fighting, endless negotiations, or a coercive transition imposed from outside — outcomes that could deepen instability rather than resolve it. Al Jazeera+1

Open questions, editors, and diplomats will press on

Key details remain unresolved: the legal status and mandate of the Board of Peace; who will provide security inside Gaza during the transition; the timeline and thresholds for handing authority back to the PA; the composition and selection process for the transitional committee; and binding enforcement mechanisms or guarantees to ensure compliance. Regional actors’ willingness to underwrite guarantees on paper and in practice will be decisive. Reuters+1

The immediate diplomatic picture

For now, the plan has Netanyahu’s public backing and praise from Sir Tony Blair, who called it a “huge signal of support and confidence in the future of Gaza.”

But without Hamas’s agreement and with many procedural and security questions unanswered, the initiative looks like a high-stakes diplomatic gamble: a blueprint for rapid reconstruction if all parties comply, and a potential justification for renewed force if they do not.

The coming days will determine whether mediators can convert the proposal into an enforceable ceasefire or whether the conflict will instead enter a new, more dangerous phase. CBS News+1

Five Unanswered Questions:

1. How will Gaza be governed?

The plan envisions a technocratic Palestinian committee under the oversight of a “Board of Peace” chaired by Donald Trump and Tony Blair. But it leaves unclear who selects the committee and how power will be divided between the two bodies.

2. Will the Palestinian Authority be involved?

Trump’s proposal says the PA could eventually take over Gaza once it “reforms,” but no benchmarks or timelines are set. Netanyahu, however, has openly rejected a PA return, deepening the uncertainty.

3. How will the international force be formed?

The plan calls for a temporary International Stabilisation Force to secure Gaza but offers no details. It remains unclear which countries would contribute troops, their mandate, or rules of engagement.

4. When will Israel withdraw?

Withdrawal is tied to Gaza’s “demilitarisation,” but the proposal provides no clear timeline or standards. Israel also insists on keeping a “security perimeter” until it deems threats eliminated.

5. Is Palestinian statehood on the cards?

The plan only hints that reforms and redevelopment “may” open a pathway to statehood, without guarantees. Palestinian self-determination is framed as an aspiration rather than a recognised right.