NEW DELHI: Even as the ceasefire in Gaza is tottering amid the continued killing of Palestinians, instead of strengthening the fragile truce, the Trump administration is making swift moves towards the second phase of the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict, a 20-point roadmap for “lasting peace, stability, reconstruction, and prosperity” in the region.
In his characteristic idiosyncratic style, in trying to cobble together multiple bodies, US President Donald Trump appears to be blustering his way through a complex situation that requires an understated and nuanced approach.
Besides the usual unseemly haste, not much effort seems to have gone into consulting other stakeholders and arriving at a consensus.
The powerful Gaza Executive Board and the choice of its members are unlikely to inspire confidence among Palestinians. The motley crowd includes different types of moneybags, namely billionaire businessmen, property moguls, and former head honchos.
And then there is Tony Blair, widely discredited for his role in the destruction of Iraq based on a pack of lies.
Trump is also trying to rope in “world leaders”, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, to be part of his “Board of Peace”. There are references to payment of a whopping billion dollars for a permanent seat on the board. While mobilising financial resources for the initiative is important, there are better ways than dangling a permanent seat as a carrot.
The ceasefire is unfinished business that is crying for attention. Not only does bloodletting continue in Gaza, a recalcitrant Israel obstinately continues to obstruct aid to the beleaguered people suffering in the harsh winter.
Herein lies the problem: Israel insists on the disarmament of Hamas, and the latter rightly would not do so due to its legitimate distrust and in the absence of any guarantee of safety. A multinational peacekeeping force on the ground could help create a buffer zone protecting Gaza from Israeli attacks, but there is little enthusiasm among countries to literally join forces.
India too must be carefully weighing its options, and with some trepidation, given its recent experience in dealing with Trump and his administration. It is a classic case of once bitten, twice shy, evident in not jumping at the offer. How much independence and agency New Delhi will have in a Washington-driven initiative is anybody’s guess. India’s strategic autonomy cannot afford further public undermining, nor can New Delhi be seen kowtowing to Trump, as he will rub it in by trumpeting exaggerated accounts.
Like several other countries, India too will be wary of bypassing the present UN system, despite its flaws and weaknesses. Foreign policy experts have pointed out that Washington is testing the waters and may replicate the Gaza model in other global hotspots such as Ukraine and Venezuela.
It is in the interest of many countries to have a reformed and strengthened UN system for conflict resolution rather than a US-led system that, besides marginalising Palestinian interests, prioritises narrow commercial and security objectives and would be brazen about it, unlike in the past when it at least had the fig leaf of exporting democracy.
Adding to India’s discomfiture and dilemma is the timing, as it can ill afford to antagonise Uncle Sam ahead of concluding a trade deal. Certainly an intractable foreign policy challenge for the NDA government.