TEHRAN – U.S. President Donald Trump’s 20-point ceasefire plan for Gaza has been promoted as a pathway to Palestinian self-determination and eventual statehood. Yet Israeli officials have made clear that such statehood will never be accepted, exposing the truce plan as a diplomatic pretense designed to advance U.S. and Israeli agendas under the guise of peace.

Israeli rejection

Israel’s political leadership has spoken with remarkable unanimity. Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that “Israel’s policy is clear: there will be no Palestinian state,” vowing Gaza would be “demilitarized down to the last tunnel.” Foreign Minister Gideon Saar echoed this, insisting Israel “would not agree” to Palestinian sovereignty.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “silence and diplomatic disgrace,” demanding an explicit rejection. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir denied the existence of a Palestinian people altogether, proposing “voluntary emigration” as a solution. Culture Minister Miki Zohar argued that any deal with Saudi Arabia must exclude recognition of a Palestinian state.

Far-right MK Avi Maoz accused Trump of “advancing a Palestinian terror state,” while the Yesha Council reaffirmed its long-standing position that “it’s either [Israeli] sovereignty or a Palestinian state.” This chorus of rejection across the political spectrum leaves little doubt: Israel will not permit Palestinian statehood, and the U.S. administration is fully aware of this reality.

Normalization costs

The broader geopolitical context is equally revealing. Normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia has become a central objective for Washington. Reports suggest Israel is prepared to accept U.S. sales of advanced F-35 fighter jets to Riyadh, but only if linked to normalization. Saudi Arabia, however, has insisted that any agreement must include a credible roadmap toward Palestinian statehood — a principled stance that sets Riyadh apart from other Arab states that normalized relations without securing concessions for Palestinians.

Israeli officials, by contrast, demand normalization without statehood. Smotrich even disparaged Saudi Arabia with a racist remark, suggesting the Saudis could “keep riding camels,” highlighting the contempt with which Israel’s far right views Arabs and the fragility of U.S. efforts to broker a deal.

Diplomatic cover

Trump’s ceasefire plan ultimately functions as a diplomatic mask. It invokes the language of Palestinian self-determination to reassure Arab states, while embedding security provisions that serve Israel’s priorities.

* For the United States, the plan sustains its influence, facilitates arms sales, and positions Washington as an indispensable mediator.
* For Israel, it requires no immediate concessions while keeping normalization prospects alive.
* For Arab states, it offers symbolic recognition of Palestinian aspirations, though without substantive guarantees.

This dual messaging — promises of statehood for Arab audiences, security assurances for Israel — reveals the U.S. truce plan’s instrumental nature. It is less a peace initiative than a mechanism for advancing U.S. and Israeli strategic interests under the cover of diplomacy.

Regional consequences

The consequences are clear. Palestinians see no genuine path to sovereignty, given Israel’s outright rejection. Israeli ministers advocate forced emigration and disparage Arab partners, revealing the extremism driving policy. Taken together, these dynamics show that normalization, under the current ceasefire plan, threatens to widen divisions rather than build stability, ultimately entrenching inequality and prolonging conflict instead of opening the road to peace.