In our rapidly changing world, the ongoing situation in Gaza serves as a stark reminder of the persistent violence and suffering faced by its inhabitants. Despite some claims of a ceasefire, the reality on the ground reveals a different story—one still marked by starvation, violence, and the continued oppression of the Palestinian people. This article examines the underlying motives behind this so-called ceasefire, highlighting its role in protecting Israel’s international image while the humanitarian crisis persists. Now more than ever, it’s crucial to amplify the voices advocating for justice and accountability.
By Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies. Benjamin is the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher for CODEPINK, and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.
On October 4, 2025, during an interview with Axios, President Trump emphasized that a primary goal of his Gaza plan is to restore Israel’s standing in the international arena. “Bibi took it very far and Israel lost a lot of support in the world,” Trump remarked. “Now I am gonna get all that support back.”
According to Trump’s plan, a supposed ceasefire came into effect on October 10. However, Israel retreated from less than half of the Gaza Strip and, in the following two weeks, killed at least 93 people—consistent with the violence that had characterized previous years. Israel has permitted only 15% of the humanitarian aid outlined in the plan to enter Gaza, while the critical Rafah crossing with Egypt remains closed. The struggle for basic necessities such as food, water, and shelter continues unabated for two million Gazans.
While any reduction in the scale of Israel’s violence is a welcome development, it does not constitute a genuine ceasefire. Like previous instances, this one-sided ceasefire allows Israel to operate beyond accountability, violating the terms at will.
Mahmud Hams / AFP / Getty Image
This ceasefire marks only the initial phase of Trump’s Gaza plan, with significant portions still unresolved, such as the disarmament of Hamas, the entity that currently governs Gaza. Hamas also bears the critical responsibility of shielding its citizens from Israeli-backed gangs and death squads, some aligned with ISIS, that terrorize the community, hijack aid supplies, and carry out targeted killings.
Under the current circumstances, Hamas is unlikely to agree to disarm, having previously asserted it would only relinquish its arms once Palestine has an internationally recognized government equipped with its own armed forces. Conversely, Israel has yet to agree to other components of Trump’s strategy, such as a full withdrawal from Gaza or a comprehensive plan addressing Palestine’s future.
In the United States, many political figures and media outlets accept or even endorse the misleading narratives surrounding Trump’s plan as definitive solutions to the Palestinian crisis. However, the global community remains acutely aware and skeptical of such claims. Many governments also find themselves beholden to oligarchies that profit from arms deals and trade with Israel, even as their populations express outrage at Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and the impunity for its actions.
Trump’s Gaza plan, much like his broader foreign policy, takes advantage of the economic and political anxieties of leaders seeking a quick solution conducive to profit and stability. Acknowledging that Israel has “lost a lot of support in the world,” he
provides an easy avenue back to “business as usual” for governments eager to continue lucrative interactions despite Israel’s ongoing violations and flagrant disregard for international law.
During his first term, Trump facilitated the “Abraham Accords,” normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab nations, including Bahrain and the UAE, that established mutual recognition and enhanced trade relations. Now, he is eyeing the potential normalization with Saudi Arabia.
However, relations between Arab nations and Israel remain fraught with historic contention. In the 1949 UN General Assembly vote regarding Israel’s admission, all Arab and Muslim member states except Turkey voted against recognizing Israel. Even today, numerous Arab countries either do not recognize Israel or lack diplomatic relations with it.
Despite decades of antagonism, Trump successfully persuaded Israel and some Arab nations to back his Gaza initiative, promising future rewards through normalization and trade. Nonetheless, significant barriers remain, as these countries maintain that recognition of Israel hinges on its acknowledgment of Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza.
The core tenets of Netanyahu’s Likud Party revolve around the establishment of a Greater Israel, achieved through the annexation of all Palestinian territories “between the sea and the Jordan.” This notion was further highlighted on October 22 during Vice President Vance’s visit, when the Knesset voted to annex the West Bank.
Trump unveiled his Gaza plan at the tail end of the UN General Assembly’s annual high-level meeting in New York, where many world leaders called for more vigorous international intervention against Israel. The New York Declaration, supported by 142 nations, was the outcome of a July conference initiated by France and Saudi Arabia that vowed “concrete, timebound, coordinated action” to enforce a 2024 ICJ decision declaring Israel’s occupation illegal and mandating an expedited end to it.
Trump’s actions temporarily sidelined and diluted calls for stronger measures at the UN. However, on October 22, the ICJ issued a new ruling that sharply condemned Israel’s use of starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza. The ruling affirmed that Israel, as an occupying force, must ensure the availability of essential needs such as food, water, fuel, shelter, and medicine. It also mandated that Israel facilitate the operations of UN staff working for UNRWA in Gaza, countering Israel’s unsubstantiated claims regarding their alleged connection to Hamas during its October 2023 incursion.
Following the ICJ’s decision, Norway announced plans to introduce a resolution in the UN General Assembly aimed at enforcing the Court’s directives, including the full delivery of aid to Gaza. Humanitarian advocates are hopeful this resolution will be presented in an Emergency Special Session under the “Uniting For Peace” option, facilitating “concrete, timebound, coordinated action” promised in July—potentially incorporating sanctions like an arms embargo and specific trade measures that could be implemented quickly if Israel continues obstructing aid deliveries.
Trump’s plan was crafted to solidify the narrative surrounding Israel’s actions—aiming to cleanse the record of its crimes and U.S. complicity, while ushering in a new phase of normalized occupation and Israel’s diplomatic rehabilitation. Yet, even prior to the ICJ’s condemnation of Israel’s starvation policy, public mobilization was already underway globally, demanding accountability for Israel’s actions.
In Europe, momentum for accountability continues to gain traction. As the British Parliament discusses a new pensions law, an amendment has been proposed to divest local government pension funds from companies profiting from the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine. Many UK local councils have already passed individual ordinances to this effect, but the new amendment would enforce divestment of the $16 billion still invested in these firms across all councils.
In September, the European Union (EU) announced intentions to suspend its longstanding free trade agreement with Israel and to impose sanctions on extremist Israeli officials and settlers. However, on October 20, it “paused” these measures in light of Trump’s plan, provoking swift backlash from critics.
Over 400 former diplomats and officials signed a statement urging the EU to take decisive action “against spoilers and extremists” hindering the establishment of a future Palestinian state, emphasizing that Trump’s plan inadequately addresses that objective. Legal experts advise EU leaders that policy must comply with the ICJ’s ruling, which mandates the end of the illegal Israeli occupation as swiftly as possible.
Several European nations, including Belgium, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain, have already imposed bans on imports from illegal Israeli settlements. Ireland is currently debating a similar trade ban as part of its Occupied Territories Bill, expected to be finalized by January. Advocates hope to extend the ban to services, while business lobbying efforts, including those from U.S. tech companies with European operations, seek to prevent its passage. Notably, the newly elected Irish president, Catherine Connolly, is a staunch supporter of Palestine.
Contrary to much of the global response to Trump’s Gaza plan and Israel’s ongoing unlawful occupation, U.S. officials are eager to advance and deepen Washington’s military partnership with Israel.
This partnership is typically renewed every decade through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the two governments, which should ideally be negotiated in 2026, ahead of the expiration of the current MOU in 2028.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is already considering a bipartisan bill (S.554) aimed at initiating this process, titled the “United States-Israel Defense Partnership Act of 2025.” This legislation would authorize collaborative projects with Israel in areas such as “counteracting unmanned systems… anti-tunneling cooperation… and authority overwar reserves.”
Notably absent from this policy review is any discussion regarding U.S. complicity in the destruction of Gaza—a critical dialogue that should precede any serious reassessment of the U.S.–Israel alliance.
On October 20, Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights, released a new report titled “Gaza Genocide: A Collective Crime,” which summarizes:
“The ongoing genocide in Gaza is a collective crime, sustained by the complicity of influential Third States that have enabled longstanding systemic violations of international law by Israel. Framed by colonial narratives that dehumanize the Palestinians, this live-streamed atrocity has been facilitated through Third States’ direct support, material aid, diplomatic protection, and, in some cases, active participation. It has exposed an unprecedented chasm between peoples and their governments, betraying the trust on which global peace and security rest. The world now stands on a knife-edge between the collapse of the international rule of law and hope for renewal. Renewal is only possible if complicity is confronted, responsibilities are met, and justice is upheld.”
We call on all members of the Senate and House Foreign Relations Committees to review the UN report and to invite UN experts to testify at hearings on U.S. involvement and participation in war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Palestine.
Moving forward with discussions of a new MOU or any arms transfers to Israel without a thorough assessment of U.S. complicity would only perpetuate the endless conflicts that all our leaders, including President Trump, claim they aim to end.
