UN Security Council Approves Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan: Full Coverage, Global Reactions & Ground Impact

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has officially approved a US-drafted resolution endorsing Donald Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan, aimed at stabilising the war-ravaged enclave and establishing a transitional mechanism for governance, security, and reconstruction. The move marks one of the most consequential diplomatic interventions in the Israel–Palestine conflict in recent years—yet the plan has immediately sparked sharp rejection from Hamas, mixed reactions across the Middle East, and political ripples worldwide.

This blog provides a full, detailed, elaborated coverage of the latest updates, media perspectives, political analyses, and implications on the ground.

1. What Exactly Did the UNSC Approve? A Quick Breakdown

The Security Council, after intense negotiations, passed the US-sponsored resolution introducing a multilayered strategy for Gaza’s future. The highlights include:

✔ International Stabilisation Force (ISF)

• A multinational force, not including Israeli soldiers.

• Mandated to operate in Gaza until 2027, subject to annual reviews.

• Responsible for internal security, policing, logistics, and monitoring ceasefire adherence.

✔ Conditional and Phased Israeli Withdrawal

• Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) will withdraw only after the stabilisation force is deployed.

• Withdrawal depends on verifiable disarmament measures by militant groups.

✔ Gaza Reconstruction Framework

• A $30+ billion reconstruction program involving UN agencies, the US, EU, and Gulf donors.

• Focus areas: essential services, housing, hospitals, water & power grids.

✔ “Terror-Free” Gaza

• Trump administration insists on complete demilitarisation of Gaza.

• Militias must disarm or face sanctions, embargoes, and international monitoring.

✔ A ‘Possible’ Path Toward Palestinian Statehood

• Not explicitly guaranteed.

• Mentions governance reforms and transitional authority leading to “conditions for a two-state outcome.”

✔ Humanitarian Corridors and Ceasefire Terms

• Immediate establishment of humanitarian corridors.

• Hostage-release mechanism linking humanitarian access with demilitarisation progress.

2. How Did the Vote Play Out at the UN?

The resolution passed with notable alignment—but not without tension:

• For: US, UK, France, Japan, South Korea, India, Switzerland, Ecuador, and others.

• Against: None.

• Abstentions: Russia, China, Algeria (Arab representative).

Russia initially circulated a rival proposal demanding:

• Full ceasefire without preconditions.

• Israeli withdrawal before foreign troops.

• A stronger commitment to Palestinian statehood.

China shared similar concerns but avoided vetoing, allowing the US resolution to pass.

The passing of this resolution is being described as:

• “Historic” by US officials

• “Dangerous” by Hamas

• “Constructive compromise” by several European nations

• “Insufficient” by Arab blocs

3. Hamas Rejects the Plan: “Resistance Is Our Right”

Multiple outlets including The Times of India, Al Jazeera, NDTV, The Guardian, and Deccan Chronicle confirm that Hamas has outrightly rejected the peace plan.

Key Reasons for Hamas’s Rejection:

1. International Stabilisation Force = ‘Foreign Occupation’

Hamas claims the proposed force is:

• A cover for Western and Israeli influence.

• A violation of Palestinian sovereignty.

• An attempt to disarm resistance movements.

2. No Guarantee of Palestinian Statehood

The resolution references a “possible pathway,” which Hamas calls:

• Vague

• Politically meaningless

• Another “Oslo-style trap”

3. Opposition to Disarmament

Hamas insists that:

• Armed resistance is a right under international law.

• Disarmament cannot precede full Israeli withdrawal.

4. Israel’s Response: Cautious, Positive, but Watchful

Israeli officials have not fully endorsed the plan publicly, but diplomatic signals suggest:

• Israel supports the stabilisation force replacing Hamas governance.

• Israel is comfortable with no immediate commitment to a Palestinian state.

• Israel insists demilitarisation is non-negotiable.

However, political factions within Israel are divided:

• Right-wing parties fear international troops may limit IDF activities.

• Centrists see it as a chance to avoid reoccupying Gaza.

• Security establishments welcome a structured, monitored transition.

5. Arab Nations: Supportive Yet Deeply Concerned

Egypt & Jordan

• Support humanitarian stabilisation.

• Warn that any governance excluding Palestinians will fail.

Qatar

• Concerned that the plan sidelines existing ceasefire talks.

Algeria (UN Security Council member)

• Abstained.

• Criticised the resolution for:

  • Weak language on occupation

  • Lack of guarantees for Palestinian rights

Saudi Arabia & UAE

• Support reconstruction framework.

• Push for more direct mention of two-state solution.

6. Global Media Perspectives

Western Media

• NYT / Washington Post / BBC: Frame the vote as a “turning point” in Trump’s diplomatic approach.

• CNN: Highlights internal disputes between the US and Russia/China.

• Reuters: Focuses on the legal, military, and structural roadmap.

Middle Eastern Media

• Al Jazeera / Middle East Monitor: Strongly critical, calling it “US-Israeli trusteeship.”

• Times of Israel / Jerusalem Post: Frame it as a victory for Israeli security.

Asian & European Media

• India Today / Hindustan Times: Highlight geopolitical implications.

• The Guardian: Notes potential risks of “internationalizing the Gaza conflict.”

7. What Does the Stabilisation Force Look Like?

Based on available details:

• Likely contributors: US, EU nations, Canada, Australia, Japan, India, Egypt, Jordan.

• Excluded: Israel and Palestinian militias.

• Tasks:

  • Policing & securing aid routes

  • Demilitarisation monitoring

  • Rebuilding civil infrastructure

  • Supporting transitional government

Concerns:

• Safety: Gaza remains a high-risk zone.

• Legitimacy: Will Palestinians accept foreign troops?

• Coordination: With multiple nations involved, operational clarity is crucial.

8. Key Challenges Ahead

1. Hamas Rejection

Without buy-in, disarmament and ceasefire enforcement become impossible.

2. Israeli Reservations

Security concerns may delay or complicate troop withdrawal.

3. Arab Skepticism

Perception of “foreign control” threatens local legitimacy.

4. Russia & China’s Opposition

They may push counter-resolutions or diplomatic obstruction.

5. Gaza’s Humanitarian Crisis

Millions displaced, infrastructure destroyed—stabilisation will require unprecedented cooperation.

9. What Happens Next?

Immediate Next Steps

• UN to assemble the stabilisation force.

• US diplomats to negotiate with Israel and Arab partners.

• Humanitarian corridors to begin functioning.

• UN agencies to coordinate reconstruction assessments.

Medium Term (6–12 months)

• Deployment of forces

• Partial IDF withdrawal

• Establishment of transitional Palestinian governance

Long Term (2–3 years)

• Full humanitarian recovery

• Political roadmap for elections

• Assessment of Palestinian statehood pathway

10. Conclusion: A Historic Vote, but an Uncertain Road Ahead

The UNSC’s approval of Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan marks a dramatic geopolitical milestone, yet the plan’s success depends on:

• Hamas’s willingness (currently zero)

• Israel’s cooperation

• Arab acceptance

• Operational capacity of the stabilisation force

• International unity

The world has endorsed a framework.
But will Gaza see real peace?
The coming weeks and months will answer that question.