Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : The world has finally witnessed an extraordinary development: the guns in Gaza have fallen silent. After months of relentless bombing, destruction, and the slow suffocation of a besieged population, Donald Trump’s unprecedented peace plan has brought at least a temporary halt to the horror. Aid is now trickling into Gaza, families that had endured starvation are receiving a semblance of relief, and the hope of survival, however fragile, is returning to a battered land. Yet the relief is tempered by the rhetoric of Benjamin Netanyahu, who insists that Israel’s objectives remain unchanged. His refusal to admit defeat conceals an anger at failing to persuade Trump to bless a complete annihilation of Gaza and its annexation into Israel’s expanding dream of territorial conquest.
This war, conceived by Israel and prosecuted with staggering ferocity, has ended in exhaustion rather than triumph. For the people of Gaza and the West Bank, the devastation is almost indescribable. United Nations and World Bank assessments estimate that Gaza alone faces over fifty billion dollars in reconstruction needs, with nearly seventy billion required to restore what has been lost. More than fifty-five million tons of rubble bury homes, schools, and hospitals, enough to fill thirteen pyramids of Giza. Electricity grids, water systems, hospitals, and telecommunications have been flattened. The human cost is greater still: tens of thousands dead, many more maimed, families erased, and an entire generation displaced.
Yet despite these horrors, the end of open conflict has already produced ripples felt far beyond the Levant. Perhaps the most immediate effect has been on global energy markets. During the war, the mere fear of disruption in Middle Eastern supply lines, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea trade routes, added a risk premium to oil. Brent crude had soared above eighty dollars a barrel, driving fuel and shipping costs higher across the globe. With hostilities ending, oil prices have tumbled to around sixty-one dollars a barrel, their lowest in five months. In the United States, gasoline prices that averaged four dollars a gallon only weeks ago are now edging closer to two dollars in some states, a correction that promises relief not only at the pump but across every layer of the economy.
Energy is the bloodstream of modern commerce. When oil and gas prices fall, every input cost—from transport to manufacturing to food distribution—drops in tandem. Lower energy costs ease inflationary pressure, reduce the consumer price index, and expand household purchasing power. For American families struggling with high costs of living, this decline may prove transformative. The dividend will be shared across the industrialized world, lowering inflation in Europe and Asia, reducing transport costs for global trade, and calming volatile markets that had priced in the risk of an expanded Middle Eastern war.
The greatest beneficiaries, however, may be in the developing world. Countries like Pakistan, Egypt, and those across Sub-Saharan Africa, which import most of their energy needs, have been spending much of their export earnings and foreign reserves on oil bills. High prices pushed them toward debt crises, leaving little for infrastructure or social spending. Now, with energy costs receding, these economies will regain some fiscal breathing space. Foreign exchange reserves will stabilize, debt servicing will become less crushing, and scarce resources can be redirected to development and poverty alleviation. For Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India—together home to over two billion people—the respite in energy costs is no less than a lifeline. Add China, the world’s largest energy importer, and the region accounts for nearly four billion people now benefiting directly from the dividends of this peace.
Equally important is the impact on trade. During the war, insurance premiums for ships passing through Middle Eastern waters soared, freight costs climbed, and global supply chains faced unpredictable delays. The ceasefire reduces these risks almost overnight. Cheaper shipping and lower risk premiums will improve the competitiveness of exporters, stabilize imports of food and essential goods, and ultimately lower costs for consumers worldwide. The IMF has already noted that a durable peace in Gaza could improve regional growth prospects by as much as one percentage point, a significant gain for struggling economies.
Peace also reshapes politics. Governments that were facing unrest from rising food and fuel prices suddenly have a cushion. Political leaders in fragile states can buy time, enact reforms, or at least ease the burden on citizens. This in turn creates a measure of stability, the very foundation of legitimacy and governance. The dividends of peace, therefore, are not only economic but also political, strengthening societies at their weakest points.
Still, there remains the urgent question of responsibility. Who will pay for Gaza’s reconstruction? It is not enough for wealthy states to open their treasuries out of charity while those who unleashed destruction escape unscathed. International law and morality demand that blame be apportioned. Israel, Hamas, regional actors, and global powers that contributed to the devastation should be compelled to shoulder the costs. Without such accountability, the precedent would be disastrous: that any powerful nation may devastate its weaker neighbor and walk away without consequence. Gaza must not become a template for impunity. Compensation must also reach families of innocent victims—children, women, doctors, and journalists—whose lives were shattered.
The road ahead is perilous. The peace is fragile and could collapse under renewed aggression. Donor pledges may falter, leaving reconstruction incomplete. Funds may be captured by elites or foreign contractors, breeding resentment rather than renewal. Regional tensions—whether in Lebanon, Syria, or Iran—could reignite conflict and restore the risk premium to oil markets. The dividends of peace are real but remain precariously balanced on the commitments of guarantors like the United States, which must enforce its plan with vigilance.
For Donald Trump, the Gaza ceasefire is not only a diplomatic achievement but also a political claim. He has boasted of stopping eight wars and now turns his gaze toward Russia and Ukraine, pledging to end that grinding conflict as well. Should he succeed, he would enter history as the president who halted nine wars in a single year of office. Whether this is bravado or foresight remains to be seen, but the Gaza experience proves that even entrenched conflicts can yield when backed by resolve and pressure from the most powerful office on earth.
In the final analysis, the dividends of Gaza–Israel peace are vast. Lower energy costs, subdued inflation, revitalized trade, fiscal space for fragile economies, and a political reprieve for leaders facing unrest all stem from this fragile truce. But the greatest dividend may be moral: the reminder that peace, even imperfect, enriches humanity far more than war, which impoverishes all. If the world seizes this moment to rebuild Gaza with justice, fairness, and accountability, it may set a precedent that aggression must pay and that peace, not conquest, yields the truest victory.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : The moment finally arrived for which the world had waited for decades. After years of bloodshed, hunger, humiliation, and despair, a breakthrough came in the form of President Donald Trump’s 21-point peace plan, a framework that has begun to reshape the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in ways unimaginable just weeks earlier. The first signs of change came quickly. Over 2,000 Palestinian prisoners were released by Israel, while Hamas promised to return Israeli hostages. Humanitarian aid — long blocked at the borders — began to flow again into Gaza, bringing food, medicine, and hospital supplies to a population starved not only of nourishment but of hope. For the first time in years, mothers carried bread home with tears of relief, fathers clutched medicine as if it were treasure, and children smiled with bowls of food in their hands.
This breakthrough was not achieved through Israel’s goodwill, nor was it the result of another round of fruitless diplomacy. It was the direct consequence of American pressure, a departure from decades of U.S. policy that shielded Israel from accountability at all costs. Trump’s plan not only offered deadlines and frameworks; it came with guarantees. The United States pledged to monitor the process directly, ensuring both Hamas and Israel would adhere to the commitments they had signed onto. Vice President JD Vance confirmed that monitoring teams had already been deployed inside Gaza, across the West Bank, and along the Israel–Gaza border, setting up observation and reporting posts to oversee every step of implementation. This was not a distant promise but a living process already underway, a signal that the plan had moved from paper to reality.
What made this moment remarkable was not only the details of the agreement but the way it came into being. For decades, Israel acted as though international law and humanitarian norms were irrelevant, dismissing United Nations resolutions, ignoring the International Court of Justice, and defying UNESCO rulings. Its leaders, particularly Benjamin Netanyahu, cultivated an aura of invincibility, convinced that American protection was unconditional. That conviction was not without foundation. For generations, U.S. lawmakers, policymakers, and media institutions had been bent to the will of pro-Israel lobbying networks, often at the expense of American reputation, global standing, and even national interest. It was this iron grip that made Trump’s move so astonishing.
By pushing forward with the plan, Trump shattered that long-standing dynamic. He defied the machinery of lobbying, money, and influence that had dictated American policy on Israel for decades. He did not act alone; behind him stood the collective weight of the Muslim world, whose wealth and unity presented a new reality. For the first time, Muslim nations — from Turkey to Saudi Arabia, from Pakistan to Malaysia — stood shoulder to shoulder at a United Nations conference, demanding action and refusing to endorse any solution that did not prioritize Palestinian dignity. Trump read the room not as an opportunist but as a realist. He recognized that American interests, global stability, and moral responsibility all converged on one conclusion: the time for enabling Israel’s expansionist ambitions was over.
That Israel, despite its hardliners who openly called for the annihilation of Gaza’s population, including infants, was compelled to accept the peace plan demonstrates just how far the ground has shifted. Trump is now set to visit Israel, addressing the Knesset in a moment that would have been unthinkable in past years. Even as extremists pledged to continue their crusade for “Greater Israel,” the political reality has changed. The United States, not Israel, is now the guarantor of the next chapter.
Equally significant is the upcoming international conference in Egypt, to be co-hosted by Trump and President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. World leaders will converge not merely to celebrate the peace plan but to design a mechanism of enforcement and punishment. For the first time, Israel is being told in clear terms that violations will not be without consequence. Trump’s insistence, echoed by Vice President Vance, that America’s Central Command presence and military infrastructure in the Middle East will ensure compliance provides the plan with the credibility all others lacked. It is this enforcement guarantee that transforms the plan from just another diplomatic gesture into a living reality.
The ripple effects are profound. Across Europe, long skeptical of Israeli intransigence, leaders expressed cautious relief. In the global South, the plan rekindled hope that justice could still prevail for the marginalized and oppressed. Within the Muslim world, unity was reinforced by the undeniable reality that their collective power had been decisive in shaping this outcome. And within the United States itself, ordinary citizens and social media movements found validation in seeing their government finally break from blind obedience to Israeli priorities.
For decades, mainstream media outlets, heavily influenced by pro-Israel interests, shaped the narrative to Israel’s advantage. Today, however, that monopoly is collapsing. Social media platforms have pierced the information wall, exposing Israeli atrocities and amplifying Palestinian suffering to global audiences. Trump’s plan tapped into this shift, reflecting not only strategic calculations but also the growing demand from civil society worldwide that U.S. foreign policy reflect humanitarian values.
Israel’s reluctant acceptance of limits imposed by the plan marks a watershed. For the first time, its leadership has been compelled to recognize that there are boundaries to its ambitions. The narrative of divine entitlement to Palestinian land is being challenged by political reality. The global message is clear: Israel is not above international law, not beyond accountability, and not free to dictate terms unilaterally. By enforcing these limits, the plan strikes at the heart of expansionist ideology.
Of course, challenges remain. Hardliners within Israel will resist, and spoilers on both sides may seek to derail the fragile progress. But unlike past initiatives, this plan carries deterrence. Monitoring teams are already on the ground, reporting directly to Washington, and a punitive mechanism is being prepared. These elements give the plan resilience where others failed. If enforced with consistency, it may finally break the cycle of occupation, insurgency, and crackdowns that have defined the conflict for generations.
The broader significance extends well beyond Israel and Palestine. Trump’s 21-point plan signals a reorientation of American foreign policy, breaking the stranglehold of lobbying networks and restoring independence to U.S. decision-making. It affirms that Muslim nations, when united, can shape global outcomes. And it reasserts the principle that international law, humanitarian values, and logic have weight when backed by power.
History will remember this not only as a diplomatic breakthrough but as a moment when the architecture of global politics shifted. By confronting Israel’s defiance and asserting American oversight, Trump altered the balance of power in the Middle East. He may never hold the Nobel Peace Prize, but he has accomplished something greater: he has shown that courage, enforcement, and unity can bring hope to a people long denied it.
The images of mothers feeding their children in Gaza, of freed prisoners reunited with families, and of global leaders preparing to converge on Egypt all testify to the reality of this change. For the first time in decades, light has broken through the darkness of the Israel–Palestine conflict. The peace plan is fragile, and its future uncertain, but with monitoring already underway and enforcement guaranteed, there is at last reason to believe that justice may triumph over despair.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : President Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan has reached a critical moment. Both Israel and Hamas accepted it in principle, but both have already begun to test its limits. The ceasefire meant to stop the killing, the exchange of hostages meant to build trust, and the delivery of humanitarian aid meant to heal the wounds of war are all being delayed or distorted. The President has warned that time is running out, declaring with characteristic clarity that “time is of the essence, or massive bloodshed will follow.” His words now hang like a warning over every side that tries to play for advantage rather than peace.
In Gaza, the ceasefire has not brought calm. Instead of an unconditional pause to allow food, medicine, and relief into a starving land, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has linked every lull in fighting to the verified release of hostages. The sequence has been reversed: where aid was meant to come first, it is now held hostage to conditions. Even as Trump praised Israel’s “temporary halt” in bombing, the silence of the skies did not last long. The roar of jets and the thud of artillery soon returned. Crossings remain sealed, fuel is scarce, and trucks carrying flour and medicine are stuck behind barriers. The people of Gaza, already broken by war, are paying the price for a strategy that treats compassion as a bargaining chip.
Netanyahu’s government has also delayed the promised troop withdrawal. Instead of pulling back as the plan demands, Israeli forces have dug deeper into Gaza, creating buffer zones that extend control rather than reduce it. The plan called for a military drawdown in parallel with the arrival of international monitors. Yet what the world now sees looks less like withdrawal and more like consolidation. Within Israel’s ruling coalition, many regard the peace plan not as a step toward stability, but as a threat to years of expansionist ambition. A genuine truce, they fear, would force Israel to retreat from its newly secured zones, halt settlements, and eventually open the door to a Palestinian state — a vision utterly at odds with the idea of a “Greater Israel.”
Hamas, meanwhile, plays its own dangerous game. It has released some hostages but not all, offering gestures instead of commitments. It resists international monitoring and refuses to disarm fully, keeping its weapons hidden beneath Gaza’s ruins. Divided between its political negotiators abroad and its commanders trapped underground, Hamas sends mixed signals — one hand extended toward negotiation, the other still gripping a gun. Yet beneath the defiance lies exhaustion. Two years of relentless bombardment have shattered its infrastructure and leadership. The choice before it is stark: accept the peace plan as a path to survival or risk total annihilation. For Hamas, which has lost much of its command structure and morale, the plan offers a narrow corridor of escape, perhaps the last chance to save what remains of its movement and people.
In this sense, Israel and Hamas now stand on opposite slopes of the same mountain. Netanyahu fears that the peace plan could undo his long-cherished project of permanent dominance, while Hamas sees in it a possible lifeline. The plan’s success could mean the end of Israeli expansionism, the slowing of settlements, and the creation of a monitored Palestinian administration under international supervision — outcomes that threaten Israel’s far-right coalition. For Hamas, by contrast, successful implementation could spare its fighters from destruction and allow a gradual political reintegration through regional diplomacy. If Israel’s fear is loss of territory, Hamas’s fear is extinction.
Amid these conflicting motives stands Donald Trump, the architect of the plan and now its enforcer. He has been watching both sides closely, issuing warnings with unmistakable urgency. “Move fast,” he insists, “or massive bloodshed will follow.” He has reminded Netanyahu that the continuation of bombing could endanger U.S. strategic ties and warned Hamas that renewed attacks will bring devastating consequences. Unlike the peace brokers of the past, Trump has tied his own credibility to the plan’s survival, using both American influence and global pressure to hold the sides accountable.
The upcoming Monday meeting in Egypt will test whether this vigilance can translate into progress. Representatives from Israel, Hamas, and regional partners will gather to confirm whether the ceasefire is real, whether hostages and prisoners are being exchanged according to schedule, and whether humanitarian routes are open. If these benchmarks are met, the second phase will begin: Israeli withdrawal, deployment of international monitors, and establishment of a temporary technocratic administration in Gaza. If not, Trump may use economic and diplomatic pressure to penalize non-compliance, while Arab states may withhold reconstruction funding until good faith is proven. It will be a day that decides whether peace takes a step forward or collapses into another round of blame and bloodshed.
Yet the danger looms that if the plan fails, Israel will swiftly point the finger at Hamas and resume full-scale military operations. Its goal would be not just to defeat Hamas but to eliminate it completely, take permanent control of Gaza and the West Bank, and then pursue a broader territorial expansion toward the east. Such a move would plunge the entire region into crisis. The United Nations, the United States, and the Muslim world must remain alert to this possibility. No violation, no provocation, no act of resistance from the Palestinian side should provide Israel with the excuse it seeks to dismantle the plan. The world must make clear that the true spoiler of peace will not be allowed to hide behind false accusations.
If this truth reaches Washington, if the American Congress and public come to see that it is Israel — not Hamas — undermining the process, the political ground beneath Tel Aviv could shift. The U.S. might then be compelled to reconsider its unconditional aid and arms support, leaving Israel exposed to the isolation it fears most. Without American protection, Israel would face immense pressure from every direction — diplomatic, economic, and potentially military. The recent Iranian strike demonstrated the limits of Israeli power when left on its own. Should the wider Muslim world act in unison, Israel would have no choice but to retreat to its recognized borders and accept the peace it has long resisted.
The stakes are immense. For the Arab world, the peace plan offers a way to stabilize the region; for Europe, a chance to reclaim moral credibility; and for America, an opportunity to prove that fairness, not favoritism, defines its leadership. But if this chance is lost — if the plan is sabotaged through arrogance or deceit — the result will not simply be another failed negotiation, but the end of the last viable hope for Gaza’s survival. In the days ahead, compliance and defiance will determine not only the future of two peoples, but the credibility of the global order itself.
History will judge those who let this moment slip away. If Israel and Hamas honor their commitments, Gaza may rise from its ruins. If they continue to play for time, the window will close, and with it, the dream of peace. President Trump’s warning still echoes across the desert skies: time is short, and the blood of the innocent is running out. The world must decide — will it stand guard over peace, or watch it die?