Trump’s Gaza Blueprint is designed to liquidate Palestinian resistance, legitimize Israeli aggression, and install a foreign-controlled regime in Gaza.
Trump’s Gaza Blueprint Won’t End Palestine’s Historical Resistance. It Will Lead to Enhanced Solidarity: Rima Najjar
By Rima Najjar, Global Research, October 01, 2025
Author’s Note: This essay does not aim to decode diplomatic theater. It refuses it. It is written from a position of solidarity with Palestinian resistance and a commitment to naming colonial imposition without euphemism.
Opening: Refusal and Escalation, Not Empire
Trump and Netanyahu’s 20-point diplomatic initiative — marketed as a plan to restructure governance in Gaza and redefine Palestinian political participation — is neither a peace plan nor a novel imperial strategy. It’s a recycled blueprint for domination. Even Netanyahu is uneasy — not because the plan is unjust, but because it’s too blatant, too theatrical, too exposed.
This is the same architecture of control, repackaged in diplomatic jargon. I won’t waste space outlining its provisions or dignifying the hollow endorsements from Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE. Their statements aren’t positions — they’re noise.
What matters is the ideological clarity of the rejection. Resistance movements like Masar Badil, the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement, issued a categorical denunciation:
“This is not a peace plan. It is a colonial imposition dressed in diplomatic theater. Trump’s proposal is designed to liquidate Palestinian resistance, legitimize Israeli aggression, and install a foreign-controlled regime in Gaza. We reject it entirely — not as a negotiation, but as an extension of war.”
That’s the starting point. Not the plan’s details, but its refusal. From there, we turn to Netanyahu’s calculated ambivalence — and then to how this will unfold on the ground, beginning with Hamas and the broader resistance landscape.
Netanyahu’s Unease: Strategic Ambivalence and Calculated Distance
Netanyahu’s public stance is a mix of endorsement and staged discomfort. He’s expressed “concerns” about transitional governance and the risks of empowering non-aligned Palestinian actors. But this unease is tactical, not ideological. It’s a maneuver — feigned reluctance to deepen control while shielding himself from domestic backlash and maintaining alignment with U.S. strategic interests.
He’s not troubled by the plan’s colonial logic. He welcomes it. The consolidation of foreign control over Gaza, the sidelining of resistance, the rebranding of occupation as peace — these are outcomes he’s pursued for decades.
What unsettles him is the plan’s transparency. Its terms are so visibly skewed — so brazen in bypassing Palestinian agency and centralizing power under U.S.-Israeli command — that they risk exposing the machinery of domination usually cloaked in diplomatic language.
Netanyahu wants the same outcome: pacified resistance, controlled governance, strategic dominance. But he prefers it delivered through subtler means — negotiations that appear balanced, language that feigns neutrality, processes that allow him to deny authorship. That’s the function of plausible deniability: to secure maximalist goals while claiming moderation.
On the Ground: Resistance Will Not Be Technocratized
For resistance factions — especially Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad — this plan is not a diplomatic overture. It’s a provocation. Hamas may “study” the proposal in good faith, but that faith is tactical. It’s a delay mechanism, a way to assess leverage and prepare for escalation. Palestinian Islamic Jihad has already called the plan “a recipe to blow up the region.” They’re right.
What’s coming is a dual-track response:
- Public calibration: Hamas will issue statements of conditional openness, emphasizing reconstruction and prisoner exchanges. This is not compromise — it’s strategic ambiguity.
- Operational resistance: Behind the scenes, networks will consolidate. Surveillance will intensify. Attempts to fragment and neutralize ideological leadership will be met with countermeasures.
The plan’s emphasis on “technocratic governance” is not administrative — it’s a tool of erasure. But resistance is not a bureaucratic glitch. It’s a political reality. And it will not be absorbed into a foreign-controlled regime, no matter how many reconstruction dollars are dangled.
Resistance in Palestine has never been a malfunction to be corrected. It is the architecture of survival under siege, the infrastructure of refusal built across generations. From the fedayeen of the 1950s and 60s, to the grassroots networks of the First Intifada, to the armed and political formations of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, resistance has adapted, reconfigured, and reasserted itself in response to every attempt at containment. It is not reactive. It is generative.
This plan will not absorb resistance. It will provoke it.
How Resistance Will Manifest
- Shadow Governance: As technocrats are installed under international supervision, resistance factions will build parallel structures — informal courts, underground education networks, and social services that bypass the imposed regime. This echoes the First Intifada, when local committees replaced Israeli municipal control.
- Ideological Consolidation: Messaging will sharpen. Resistance movements will reject the language of “stabilization” and “de-radicalization” as colonial euphemisms. Political education will intensify, especially among youth, to inoculate against technocratic co-optation.
- Armed Retrenchment: Public statements may gesture toward negotiation, but armed factions will prepare for escalation. The demilitarization clause will be treated not as a condition but as a provocation. Tunnel networks, rocket development, and asymmetric tactics will continue — quietly, strategically.
- Martyrdom and Memory: The archive of resistance will expand. Every arrest, every demolition, every refusal will be documented and mythologized. Testimony will become a weapon. Visual and textual artifacts will circulate — graffiti, encrypted videos, underground publications — reasserting the legitimacy of resistance against imposed governance.
- Regional Recalibration: Resistance will not remain confined to Gaza. The West Bank, refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan, and diaspora communities will respond. Expect coordinated days of rage, symbolic actions at embassies, and renewed calls for boycott, divestment, and sanctions.
- West Bank Mobilization: Expect intensified confrontations in Jenin, Nablus, and Hebron. Armed cells will reorganize, youth networks will re-emerge, and settler incursions will be met with direct retaliation. The West Bank will not be a passive observer — it will be a second front.
The Arc That Informs This
This is not new. The British Mandate tried to install compliant intermediaries. The Oslo Accords tried to bureaucratize resistance into the Palestinian Authority. The Abraham Accords tried to normalize regional complicity. Each time, resistance re-emerged — fragmented, yes, but more adaptive.
What’s unfolding now is not the end of resistance. It’s another chapter in its evolution. And it will not be resolved by technocrats, nor pacified by reconstruction funds. Because resistance is not a glitch in the system — it is the system’s reckoning.
Trump’s Gaza blueprint will not end resistance. It will escalate it. And history will record this chapter not as peace, but as provocation.
Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa. She is an activist, researcher, and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank. Visit the author’s blog.
Featured image: Al Jazeera screenshot.
Source: Global Research
Also see: Stop the Slaughter: Urgent Call for an Armed Protection Force for Palestine.