October 1, 2025 • 20 mins
US President Donald Trump says a Gaza ceasefire is “closer than ever” - but, what’s the reality?
The White House has released a plan to end the Gaza war after Trump held talks with Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Israeli leader has apparently agreed to the 20-point plan, which still requires sign off from Hamas.
After nearly two years of war, the powers that be seem hopeful an end is near. Trump has said if Hamas doesn’t agree to the deal, it’s going to be “a very sad end”.
But, given a number of provisions are ones the terror group has previously vetoed, how realistic is it?
And who would govern Gaza once the dust settles anyway?
Today on The Front Page, Australian National University Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies senior lecturer Dr Anas Iqtait is with us to discuss the latest in the plan for peace.
Follow The Front Page on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can read more about this and other stories in the New Zealand Herald, online at nzherald.co.nz, or tune in to news bulletins across the NZME network.
Host: Chelsea Daniels
Editor/Producer: Richard Martin
Producer: Jane Yee
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Kilda.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
US President Donald Trump says a.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Gaza ceasefire is closer than ever, but what's the reality.
The White House has released a plan to end the
Gaza war after Trump held talks with Benjamin Netanya, who
the Israeli leader has apparently agreed to the twenty point plan,
which still requires sign off from Hamas.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
After nearly two.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Years of war, the powers that be seem hopeful and
ends near.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Trump has said if Hamas doesn't.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Agree to the deal, it's going to be and I quote,
a very sad end.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
But given a number of provisions are ones the terror.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Group has previously vetoed, how realistic is it and who would.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
Govern Gaza once the dust settles? Anyway?
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Today on the Front Page, Australian National University Center for
Arab and Islamic Studies senior lecturer Doctor and us ek
Tate is with us to discuss the latest in the
plan for peace. First off, and as can you tell
me about this plan? What are some of the main
(01:24):
conditions that stood out to you?
Speaker 3 (01:27):
I think the most important elements of this plan is
the fact that many Arab and Islamic countries have been
quick to endorse it, and it also came after a
meeting between Trump and many leaders of Arab and Muslim
majority countries like Turkey and Pakistan and many of those
(01:49):
many of those in the Arab world as well. So
this is the most important element in this plan, which
means that for Hamas now it is in a very
difficult position because if it refuses the plan, or it,
let's say, suggests major revisions to the plan's pillars as
(02:12):
they stand at the moment, it loses also or it
potentially loses the very little support it still has amongst
certain Arab and also Islamic audiences.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Particularly at the policy level.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
So this is the most important element, in my opinion,
behind this plan, which suggests that we may be seeing
Hamas agreeing to it in the coming days.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I mean, Trump has said that Israel would have his
full backing to continue going after her Mass if the
group rejects the deal. How do we expect her Mass though,
to agree to something that would see them excluded from
any future governing role though, I mean, is it realistic
to believe that a terrorist organization would willingly agree to that.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
I think the context of the Palestinian political system here
and political field is very important. The plan itself has
elements where Hamas seems to have full control over, so
for example, the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza, as
well as some of the pillars that relate to the
(03:26):
movement disarming, something that we still haven't heard a response
for by Hamas at the moment.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
So these are.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Pillars that Hamas has direct control over in many ways.
But then there is the wider Palestinian political field. The
plan makes this assumption which basically equates the Palestinian polity
in Gaza with Hamas and then also separates Gaza from
its wider Palestinian context. And this is precisely where the
(03:59):
second element, which is the factors that are not necessarily
under Hamas's control. So, for example, who decides who's going
to govern the Palestinians and the Gaza Strip, And why
is it that the Palestinians and the Gaza Strip are
being proposed to be governed by this sort of international
coalition that may include Palestinian names on it or technocratic names,
(04:21):
And why is this governance system or mechanism separate from
wider Palestinian governance, and why is Hamas to make a
decision about the political future of the Gaza Strip alone.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
So these are.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Things that the plan leaves ambiguous and put the sort
of the ball in Hamas's field, if you will, with
regards not only to the day to day events or
let's say the technical aspects that are related to the war,
but then also to the future of the Palestinians at
(04:53):
large in the Gaza Strip, which will definitely have ramifications
to the future of Palestinians elsewhere as well.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
You mentioned that the plan involves denying Hamas in the
future obviously in government, but it calls for two levels
of interim governance, that's that international body and a Palestinian committee.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Do you say that as a good solution.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Well, absolutely not. Again, I think this is sort of
a governance model that is being imposed internationally on the Palestinians.
And here I would just like to separate Hamas from
this discussion, because this is what I was referring to
in my earlier point, that the future of the Palestinian
political field is not in the hands of Hamas to
decide on alone. Hamas is part of the Palestinian political fabric,
(05:39):
within the Palestinian political field field. But so it's part
it's not in the hands of hamas I want to
make to make a decision on this. And then two,
we have moved past colonial governance infrastructures right and mechanisms,
so at least in the vast majority of the world,
not in the Palestinian context. It seems imposing sort of
(06:00):
a governance mechanism that is going to be chaired by
the President of the United States on Palestinians, even if
it has some Palestinian voices, is in my opinion, will
certainly prove to be unproductive, inefficient, and will backfire because
the plan will not result in what it's being promoted
(06:22):
that it's going to result in in the future, at
least in the intermediate and long terms.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Yeah, I saw that this Board of Peace as well,
it would include former British PM Tony Blair. That's a
name that's been thrown out into the ether as well
involving being involved in this in terms of Palestinian governance.
Do you think anyone has been involved in the discussions
in this plan from the Palestinian side.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
So my understanding is that the Arab leaderships or the
Arab presidents, and these of states who met with Trump
in New York have conveyed these points to the Palestinian authority,
and the Palestinian authority has been quick to agree to
the plan as a blueprint at least or.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
At least as a general blueprint to end the war
in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
That said, it really reminds me of rounds of negotiations
between Arabs and Arab leaders and Israel before the Madrid
peace process in nineteen ninety one. This is basically where
Israel used to refuse to represent or to meet with
Palestinians to negotiate with them in their capacity as Palestinians.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
And would.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Prefer to meet with the Jordanian leadership or other Arab
leaders on behalf of the Palestinians. And this is precisely
the peril that I'm drawing. Here's an international mechanism, the
United States as the leading state that is behind this
mechanism that has sort of a consensus amongst the Arab
(07:59):
leadership and the consensus amongst the international community. In the
early nineteen nineties, this resulted in the Osclo Accords and
from Palestinian's perspectives. There's consensus amongst Palestinian academics, analysts, observers
that the OSCO Accords was has been a failure and
was heavily criticized at the time as well.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
So there is a lot of in my opinion, there's
da ja vu.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
There's a lot of peril between where we are heading
with Gaza and the Madrid peace process. The only difference here,
obviously is that the Gaza situation is being separated from
the wider Palestinian situation or the wider Palestinian narrative and aspirations,
which is really worrying and worrying from the perspective that
(08:44):
it will, in my opinion, most likely result in many
issues in the intermediate and long terms that can backfire
to the stability for the region, also for the aspirations
of Palestinians as well.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
Yeah, and I think that's a really important distinction to make,
like you said, as well, the Gaza situation and the
Palestinian situation, because that they're focusing on her Maas I
see here. And another point to make, I suppose, is
that the plan also promises amnesty to members of her
Maas who agree to peaceful coexistence and to decommission their weapons. Again,
(09:22):
is this realistic or is this just a power play
from the powers that be to make the You know,
sure everyone knows that they're trying.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
They tried.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
When it fails, they have permission to go and do
what they want.
Speaker 4 (09:38):
Yes, on this very point.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Minutes after Trump obviously declared this this plan, Nitia who
commented on it, a standing next to Trump, and this
is this is something that Niteia who clearly said was
not going to happen. The from Nathaniaho's perspective or the
way that Ntinio is interpreting the peace plan, is that
it's going to result in complete victory for Israel, or
(10:04):
Israel achieving all of the pillars of its or objectives
of its operation, the five that he mentioned next to Trump.
One of them is completely defeating HAMAS, which really goes
against without explaining what happens to Hamas's members and so on,
which really goes against the points that Trump was discussing
(10:26):
about amnesty and so on.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
So my biggest issue obviously has already raised several points.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
But here I think we are circling around one of
the biggest teams and pitfalls of this plan. Which is
how big ambiguous it is and how it is left
for interpretation by both Israelis, the Palestinians, Hamas, the Palestinian
leadership of Ramala, the Arab leaders, and the Islamic leaders abroad,
and then also the United States. And this is again
(10:55):
the major pitfall, pitfall with this plan, which will which
has already resulted in some confusion.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
I've also read reports in US.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Media that that the plan had changed between Trump's meeting
with Arab and Islamic leaders and then what was made
public after a meeting with with Nimia, who particularly on
issues that relate to to addressing rhetoric inside of Israel
(11:26):
towards the Palestinians and certain other other other points that
relate to the Israelis themselves, so the Israel and then
the way that it's handling the war.
Speaker 4 (11:36):
So there's ambiguity there, there's.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Change, but for the moment, and perhaps this.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
Is something that you you you.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
May maybe you were prepared to ask me at the
later point, but for the moment, it's really the best
option that exists from the Hamassas perspective. And this is
me analyzing the situation from Hamas's perspective. From the Palestinians
for expected in Gaza Palestinian authority as well, and then
also the wider Arab and Islamic pla. This is what
(12:06):
is practical, this is what's achievable within the power relations
that exist in the region and also internationally, and therefore
there's this big push towards at least stopping the war
and then dealing with the ambiguity of this plan.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
At a later date.
Speaker 5 (12:27):
So this is a big, big day, a beautiful day,
potentially one of the great days ever in civilization, things
that have been going on for hundreds of years and
thousands of years.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
We're going to.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
At least we're at a minimum, very very close, and
I think.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
We're beharnd very close.
Speaker 5 (12:48):
And I want to thank Babe for really getting in
there and doing a jam. We worked well together, as
we have with many other countries, both of us, with
many other countries, which is the only way.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
This whole situation gets solved.
Speaker 5 (13:04):
And I'm not just talking about Guyser. Guys is one thing,
but we're talking about much beyond Guyser, the whole deal.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
I read this in the The Guardians interpretation of the plan.
It said a panel of experts will be convened to
create what the plan calls a Trump Economic Development Plan
to build and energize the territory, which the US President
has previously envisioned as of course, transforming the area into
(13:34):
a riviera with a string of high tech megacities.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Now this is where I see why.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Trump is getting so involved, not only his bid for
a noble Peace Price prize obviously at some point in
the future, I suppose, but this riviera idea and how
much money that could bring investors and you know, those
interested in it from the West?
Speaker 1 (13:58):
Or Am I being far too cynical?
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Have I gone too far down the conspiratorial pipeline here?
Speaker 4 (14:05):
Where I will comment on.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
What I will comment on is is that we are
being too optimistic that the plan at this stage will
result in.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
A governing body to begin with.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
So I even rule that out, at least in the
way that the plan is communicating that governing body. Again,
I think the Palestinians have enough credentials and have enough
have many Palestinians.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Who are well equipped to govern.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
This is regardless of, obviously the wider rhetoric at the
moment about the efficacy of Palestinian governments. So I doubt
the fact that there will be a governing body composed
in the way that the plan suggests, including Tony Blair
as taking part.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
In it, and also the United States president sharing.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
And what also what I would also like to say
is that for us, you know, students of Middle East
politics and economics, Gaza turning into the Singapore of the
Middle East or into a revere is not a new suggestion.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
In the nineteen nineties, it was widely.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
Discussed how the Oslo Accords was going to turn the
Gaza Strip into the Singapore of.
Speaker 4 (15:16):
The Middle East.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
So this is and by the way, also using the
same mechanism, so international aid, international governance, an international agreement
guaranteed by the United States, facilitated for long term peace proposal.
Speaker 4 (15:29):
So the same pillars, vaguely speaking.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Are also applied in this so called plan or supposed
peace plan, because some are also suggesting that it's going
to lead to a peace plan between the Palestinians and
Israelis atplarge, including by Trump by the way.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So that's what I will say is.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
That I don't think the governing body will even be
composed to begin with, and I also doubt that the
Singapore of the Middle East or the river era of
the Middle East is going to be established in Gaza.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Terms of making sure, because you said that there are
Palestinians very much capable of governing Palestine themselves, how do
we make sure that those voices are on the table
in future. And it isn't just you know, the powers
that be behind a big table. You know, your Trumps,
you're Blairs, whoever else is going to be joining that committee.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
It's so difficult for me to say this, but in
a way allowing the Palestinians to represent themselves, it is
absurd that we still have conditionalities on the Palestinians. Well,
we assume the Palestinians need to have reformed governance, so
called reformed governance and democracy and so on, and elections,
but at the same time, we need to make sure
(16:42):
who wins the election, and we need to make sure
that that certain political parties or certain fields within the
Palaestine larger political field don't win enough seats or influence
decision making. So the Palestinians are capable of govern in themselves,
and the international community again should step back from this
(17:05):
colonial mentality and allow the Palestinians to govern themselves. And
quite frankly, if we are going to talk about reform
and governance and who should speak on the health of
the Palestinians and so on, just look at the Israeli side.
We are having a convicted terrorist who is serving as
a minister, and this is convicted terrorists by Israeli law
itself and according to the words of previous heads of
(17:27):
intelligence services or agencies.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
Instead of Israel.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
Here we're talking about being fear And we also have
a self described fascist who's serving as the Minister of Finance.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
So we are talking about.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
Individuals that are serving that in any other government would
be unthinkable for them to serve and speak and represent
such major ministerial positions serving in the Israeli government. We're
also talking about an Israeli government that has passed resolutions
banning the even the consideration of the establishment of a
(18:02):
Palestinian political edity west of the Jordan River.
Speaker 4 (18:05):
So this is not an opinion in Israel, it's law.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
There's also the Jewish National Law twenty eighteen that against
is the right of determination for self determination inside of
the Land of Israel without defining what the Land of
Israel is, which basically for any political interpretation inside of
Israel means all of what we they call Palestine and Israel.
So this law guarantees that the rights for self determination
(18:31):
is only guaranteed to Jews inside of Greater Israel or
the land of Israel again, which means exists Palestine and
Israel today. So if we are going to look at governance,
it's how governments behave the use of violence or force
against civilians, starvation, violations of international law. Then let's look
(18:54):
at bost sides, Let's look at who has been violating
international law for decades and so on. So I'm not
a big fan of these discussions, and I know that
that's taken a lot of time addressing this particular point.
But going back to Palestinians having the credibility or the
capacity to govern themselves. In twenty eleven, the IMF, the
(19:15):
World Bank, the European Commission, and the United Nations said
that the Palestine that Palestinian institutions were ready to host
or to govern a state and independent state, and they
were at bar with countries in the region and many
other countries in the developing world.
Speaker 4 (19:32):
So Palestinian institutions.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Exist and they can govern the biggest hindrance to this
governance is obviously Israel's occupation over the Palestinians and this
has to be addressed.
Speaker 1 (19:42):
Thanks for joining us on us.
Speaker 4 (19:44):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at Enzidhrald dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
produced by Jane Yee and Richard Martin, who is also
our editor.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I'm Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you
get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for another look
behind the headlines.
Kilda.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
US President Donald Trump says a.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Gaza ceasefire is closer than ever, but what's the reality.
The White House has released a plan to end the
Gaza war after Trump held talks with Benjamin Netanya, who
the Israeli leader has apparently agreed to the twenty point plan,
which still requires sign off from Hamas.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
After nearly two.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Years of war, the powers that be seem hopeful and
ends near.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Trump has said if Hamas doesn't.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Agree to the deal, it's going to be and I quote,
a very sad end.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
But given a number of provisions are ones the terror.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Group has previously vetoed, how realistic is it and who would.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
Govern Gaza once the dust settles? Anyway?
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Today on the Front Page, Australian National University Center for
Arab and Islamic Studies senior lecturer Doctor and us ek
Tate is with us to discuss the latest in the
plan for peace. First off, and as can you tell
me about this plan? What are some of the main
(01:24):
conditions that stood out to you?
Speaker 3 (01:27):
I think the most important elements of this plan is
the fact that many Arab and Islamic countries have been
quick to endorse it, and it also came after a
meeting between Trump and many leaders of Arab and Muslim
majority countries like Turkey and Pakistan and many of those
(01:49):
many of those in the Arab world as well. So
this is the most important element in this plan, which
means that for Hamas now it is in a very
difficult position because if it refuses the plan, or it,
let's say, suggests major revisions to the plan's pillars as
(02:12):
they stand at the moment, it loses also or it
potentially loses the very little support it still has amongst
certain Arab and also Islamic audiences.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Particularly at the policy level.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
So this is the most important element, in my opinion,
behind this plan, which suggests that we may be seeing
Hamas agreeing to it in the coming days.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I mean, Trump has said that Israel would have his
full backing to continue going after her Mass if the
group rejects the deal. How do we expect her Mass though,
to agree to something that would see them excluded from
any future governing role though, I mean, is it realistic
to believe that a terrorist organization would willingly agree to that.
Speaker 3 (03:03):
I think the context of the Palestinian political system here
and political field is very important. The plan itself has
elements where Hamas seems to have full control over, so
for example, the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza, as
well as some of the pillars that relate to the
(03:26):
movement disarming, something that we still haven't heard a response
for by Hamas at the moment.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
So these are.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Pillars that Hamas has direct control over in many ways.
But then there is the wider Palestinian political field. The
plan makes this assumption which basically equates the Palestinian polity
in Gaza with Hamas and then also separates Gaza from
its wider Palestinian context. And this is precisely where the
(03:59):
second element, which is the factors that are not necessarily
under Hamas's control. So, for example, who decides who's going
to govern the Palestinians and the Gaza Strip, And why
is it that the Palestinians and the Gaza Strip are
being proposed to be governed by this sort of international
coalition that may include Palestinian names on it or technocratic names,
(04:21):
And why is this governance system or mechanism separate from
wider Palestinian governance, and why is Hamas to make a
decision about the political future of the Gaza Strip alone.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
So these are.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Things that the plan leaves ambiguous and put the sort
of the ball in Hamas's field, if you will, with
regards not only to the day to day events or
let's say the technical aspects that are related to the war,
but then also to the future of the Palestinians at
(04:53):
large in the Gaza Strip, which will definitely have ramifications
to the future of Palestinians elsewhere as well.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
You mentioned that the plan involves denying Hamas in the
future obviously in government, but it calls for two levels
of interim governance, that's that international body and a Palestinian committee.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Do you say that as a good solution.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Well, absolutely not. Again, I think this is sort of
a governance model that is being imposed internationally on the Palestinians.
And here I would just like to separate Hamas from
this discussion, because this is what I was referring to
in my earlier point, that the future of the Palestinian
political field is not in the hands of Hamas to
decide on alone. Hamas is part of the Palestinian political fabric,
(05:39):
within the Palestinian political field field. But so it's part
it's not in the hands of hamas I want to
make to make a decision on this. And then two,
we have moved past colonial governance infrastructures right and mechanisms,
so at least in the vast majority of the world,
not in the Palestinian context. It seems imposing sort of
(06:00):
a governance mechanism that is going to be chaired by
the President of the United States on Palestinians, even if
it has some Palestinian voices, is in my opinion, will
certainly prove to be unproductive, inefficient, and will backfire because
the plan will not result in what it's being promoted
(06:22):
that it's going to result in in the future, at
least in the intermediate and long terms.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Yeah, I saw that this Board of Peace as well,
it would include former British PM Tony Blair. That's a
name that's been thrown out into the ether as well
involving being involved in this in terms of Palestinian governance.
Do you think anyone has been involved in the discussions
in this plan from the Palestinian side.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
So my understanding is that the Arab leaderships or the
Arab presidents, and these of states who met with Trump
in New York have conveyed these points to the Palestinian authority,
and the Palestinian authority has been quick to agree to
the plan as a blueprint at least or.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
At least as a general blueprint to end the war
in Gaza.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
That said, it really reminds me of rounds of negotiations
between Arabs and Arab leaders and Israel before the Madrid
peace process in nineteen ninety one. This is basically where
Israel used to refuse to represent or to meet with
Palestinians to negotiate with them in their capacity as Palestinians.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
And would.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Prefer to meet with the Jordanian leadership or other Arab
leaders on behalf of the Palestinians. And this is precisely
the peril that I'm drawing. Here's an international mechanism, the
United States as the leading state that is behind this
mechanism that has sort of a consensus amongst the Arab
(07:59):
leadership and the consensus amongst the international community. In the
early nineteen nineties, this resulted in the Osclo Accords and
from Palestinian's perspectives. There's consensus amongst Palestinian academics, analysts, observers
that the OSCO Accords was has been a failure and
was heavily criticized at the time as well.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
So there is a lot of in my opinion, there's
da ja vu.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
There's a lot of peril between where we are heading
with Gaza and the Madrid peace process. The only difference here,
obviously is that the Gaza situation is being separated from
the wider Palestinian situation or the wider Palestinian narrative and aspirations,
which is really worrying and worrying from the perspective that
(08:44):
it will, in my opinion, most likely result in many
issues in the intermediate and long terms that can backfire
to the stability for the region, also for the aspirations
of Palestinians as well.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
Yeah, and I think that's a really important distinction to make,
like you said, as well, the Gaza situation and the
Palestinian situation, because that they're focusing on her Maas I
see here. And another point to make, I suppose, is
that the plan also promises amnesty to members of her
Maas who agree to peaceful coexistence and to decommission their weapons. Again,
(09:22):
is this realistic or is this just a power play
from the powers that be to make the You know,
sure everyone knows that they're trying.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
They tried.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
When it fails, they have permission to go and do
what they want.
Speaker 4 (09:38):
Yes, on this very point.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Minutes after Trump obviously declared this this plan, Nitia who
commented on it, a standing next to Trump, and this
is this is something that Niteia who clearly said was
not going to happen. The from Nathaniaho's perspective or the
way that Ntinio is interpreting the peace plan, is that
it's going to result in complete victory for Israel, or
(10:04):
Israel achieving all of the pillars of its or objectives
of its operation, the five that he mentioned next to Trump.
One of them is completely defeating HAMAS, which really goes
against without explaining what happens to Hamas's members and so on,
which really goes against the points that Trump was discussing
(10:26):
about amnesty and so on.
Speaker 4 (10:29):
So my biggest issue obviously has already raised several points.
Speaker 3 (10:33):
But here I think we are circling around one of
the biggest teams and pitfalls of this plan. Which is
how big ambiguous it is and how it is left
for interpretation by both Israelis, the Palestinians, Hamas, the Palestinian
leadership of Ramala, the Arab leaders, and the Islamic leaders abroad,
and then also the United States. And this is again
(10:55):
the major pitfall, pitfall with this plan, which will which
has already resulted in some confusion.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
I've also read reports in US.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Media that that the plan had changed between Trump's meeting
with Arab and Islamic leaders and then what was made
public after a meeting with with Nimia, who particularly on
issues that relate to to addressing rhetoric inside of Israel
(11:26):
towards the Palestinians and certain other other other points that
relate to the Israelis themselves, so the Israel and then
the way that it's handling the war.
Speaker 4 (11:36):
So there's ambiguity there, there's.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Change, but for the moment, and perhaps this.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
Is something that you you you.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
May maybe you were prepared to ask me at the
later point, but for the moment, it's really the best
option that exists from the Hamassas perspective. And this is
me analyzing the situation from Hamas's perspective. From the Palestinians
for expected in Gaza Palestinian authority as well, and then
also the wider Arab and Islamic pla. This is what
(12:06):
is practical, this is what's achievable within the power relations
that exist in the region and also internationally, and therefore
there's this big push towards at least stopping the war
and then dealing with the ambiguity of this plan.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
At a later date.
Speaker 5 (12:27):
So this is a big, big day, a beautiful day,
potentially one of the great days ever in civilization, things
that have been going on for hundreds of years and
thousands of years.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
We're going to.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
At least we're at a minimum, very very close, and
I think.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
We're beharnd very close.
Speaker 5 (12:48):
And I want to thank Babe for really getting in
there and doing a jam. We worked well together, as
we have with many other countries, both of us, with
many other countries, which is the only way.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
This whole situation gets solved.
Speaker 5 (13:04):
And I'm not just talking about Guyser. Guys is one thing,
but we're talking about much beyond Guyser, the whole deal.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
I read this in the The Guardians interpretation of the plan.
It said a panel of experts will be convened to
create what the plan calls a Trump Economic Development Plan
to build and energize the territory, which the US President
has previously envisioned as of course, transforming the area into
(13:34):
a riviera with a string of high tech megacities.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Now this is where I see why.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Trump is getting so involved, not only his bid for
a noble Peace Price prize obviously at some point in
the future, I suppose, but this riviera idea and how
much money that could bring investors and you know, those
interested in it from the West?
Speaker 1 (13:58):
Or Am I being far too cynical?
Speaker 2 (14:00):
Have I gone too far down the conspiratorial pipeline here?
Speaker 4 (14:05):
Where I will comment on.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
What I will comment on is is that we are
being too optimistic that the plan at this stage will
result in.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
A governing body to begin with.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
So I even rule that out, at least in the
way that the plan is communicating that governing body. Again,
I think the Palestinians have enough credentials and have enough
have many Palestinians.
Speaker 4 (14:31):
Who are well equipped to govern.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
This is regardless of, obviously the wider rhetoric at the
moment about the efficacy of Palestinian governments. So I doubt
the fact that there will be a governing body composed
in the way that the plan suggests, including Tony Blair
as taking part.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
In it, and also the United States president sharing.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
And what also what I would also like to say
is that for us, you know, students of Middle East
politics and economics, Gaza turning into the Singapore of the
Middle East or into a revere is not a new suggestion.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
In the nineteen nineties, it was widely.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
Discussed how the Oslo Accords was going to turn the
Gaza Strip into the Singapore of.
Speaker 4 (15:16):
The Middle East.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
So this is and by the way, also using the
same mechanism, so international aid, international governance, an international agreement
guaranteed by the United States, facilitated for long term peace proposal.
Speaker 4 (15:29):
So the same pillars, vaguely speaking.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Are also applied in this so called plan or supposed
peace plan, because some are also suggesting that it's going
to lead to a peace plan between the Palestinians and
Israelis atplarge, including by Trump by the way.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So that's what I will say is.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
That I don't think the governing body will even be
composed to begin with, and I also doubt that the
Singapore of the Middle East or the river era of
the Middle East is going to be established in Gaza.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Terms of making sure, because you said that there are
Palestinians very much capable of governing Palestine themselves, how do
we make sure that those voices are on the table
in future. And it isn't just you know, the powers
that be behind a big table. You know, your Trumps,
you're Blairs, whoever else is going to be joining that committee.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
It's so difficult for me to say this, but in
a way allowing the Palestinians to represent themselves, it is
absurd that we still have conditionalities on the Palestinians. Well,
we assume the Palestinians need to have reformed governance, so
called reformed governance and democracy and so on, and elections,
but at the same time, we need to make sure
(16:42):
who wins the election, and we need to make sure
that that certain political parties or certain fields within the
Palaestine larger political field don't win enough seats or influence
decision making. So the Palestinians are capable of govern in themselves,
and the international community again should step back from this
(17:05):
colonial mentality and allow the Palestinians to govern themselves. And
quite frankly, if we are going to talk about reform
and governance and who should speak on the health of
the Palestinians and so on, just look at the Israeli side.
We are having a convicted terrorist who is serving as
a minister, and this is convicted terrorists by Israeli law
itself and according to the words of previous heads of
(17:27):
intelligence services or agencies.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
Instead of Israel.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
Here we're talking about being fear And we also have
a self described fascist who's serving as the Minister of Finance.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
So we are talking about.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
Individuals that are serving that in any other government would
be unthinkable for them to serve and speak and represent
such major ministerial positions serving in the Israeli government. We're
also talking about an Israeli government that has passed resolutions
banning the even the consideration of the establishment of a
(18:02):
Palestinian political edity west of the Jordan River.
Speaker 4 (18:05):
So this is not an opinion in Israel, it's law.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
There's also the Jewish National Law twenty eighteen that against
is the right of determination for self determination inside of
the Land of Israel without defining what the Land of
Israel is, which basically for any political interpretation inside of
Israel means all of what we they call Palestine and Israel.
So this law guarantees that the rights for self determination
(18:31):
is only guaranteed to Jews inside of Greater Israel or
the land of Israel again, which means exists Palestine and
Israel today. So if we are going to look at governance,
it's how governments behave the use of violence or force
against civilians, starvation, violations of international law. Then let's look
(18:54):
at bost sides, Let's look at who has been violating
international law for decades and so on. So I'm not
a big fan of these discussions, and I know that
that's taken a lot of time addressing this particular point.
But going back to Palestinians having the credibility or the
capacity to govern themselves. In twenty eleven, the IMF, the
(19:15):
World Bank, the European Commission, and the United Nations said
that the Palestine that Palestinian institutions were ready to host
or to govern a state and independent state, and they
were at bar with countries in the region and many
other countries in the developing world.
Speaker 4 (19:32):
So Palestinian institutions.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Exist and they can govern the biggest hindrance to this
governance is obviously Israel's occupation over the Palestinians and this
has to be addressed.
Speaker 1 (19:42):
Thanks for joining us on us.
Speaker 4 (19:44):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at Enzidhrald dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
produced by Jane Yee and Richard Martin, who is also
our editor.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I'm Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you
get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for another look
behind the headlines.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.