With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepting President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan to end the war in Gaza at the White House on Monday, the ball is now in Hamas’ court.

Whether Hamas would agree to release the hostages first, before Israel makes any concessions other than stopping the fighting, remains to be seen. There is also newfound pressure on Qatar, a chief patron of Hamas, to convince the terror group to accept the deal.

The late Israeli elder statesman Abba Eban famously said, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” In readily accepting Trump’s plan, Netanyahu is counting on Hamas to do just that.

That’s not to say that Netanyahu opposes the plan. His calculus may be that he will be able to execute the parts he supports, while the aspects he finds less favorable are unlikely to materialize anyway — largely, he believes, due to the Palestinians’ own intransigence.

As Netanyahu noted in the press conference, the plan meets all of Israel’s war aims: Bringing back the hostages, dismantling Hamas — most of which Israel already did in the war — and making sure it no longer poses a threat to Israel, through demilitarization and deradicalization. Other elements of the plan that Israel has long said would be part of the “day after” for Gaza are a technocratic government with help from international partners, and the IDF retaining a buffer zone inside Gaza’s perimeter. Netanyahu also reportedly secured 11th-hour edits to the plan regarding the IDF’s withdrawal and Hamas’ disarmament prior to the press conference.

But the details are tricky. 

For example, point 17 of the plan: “In the event Hamas delays or rejects this proposal, the above, including the scaled-up aid operation, will proceed in the terror-free areas handed over from the IDF to the [International Stabilization Force].”

In other words, if Hamas rejects the plan, humanitarian aid “without interference” — likely including dual use items that could be exploited by terrorist organizations — would still be immediately and significantly scaled up and managed by the United Nations and Red Crescent, among others. Once an international force is put together, the IDF would still be expected to retreat from areas in which it has defeated Hamas. And a transitional, technocratic government overseen by Trump and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s “Board of Peace” would be put into place. 

All of that is meant to happen even if the hostages are not freed and Hamas refuses to lay down its arms.

Yet, Trump said that if Hamas rejects the plan: “You know, Bibi, you have the full backing to do what you have to do.” And Netanyahu made clear what that means to him — continuing the war: “Israel will finish the job by itself. This can be done the easy way or it can be done the hard way, but it will be done. We didn’t fight this horrible fight, sacrifice the finest of our young men, to have Hamas stay in Gaza.” 

Arab countries that would potentially take part in the “Board of Peace” and the International Stabilization Fund have said repeatedly that they would not participate in administering Gaza until the war ended, which makes it unclear if, as the plan says, all of that will really happen if Hamas rejects the deal and the war continues.

Then there’s the part of the plan that is most controversial in Netanyahu’s political base: the potential involvement of the Palestinian Authority in governing Gaza, and the creation of a pathway to Palestinian statehood.

“Gaza will have a peaceful administration that is run neither by Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority,” Netanyahu said in the press conference.

Yet the text of the plan says that the Gaza transitional government will only stay in place “until such time as the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program, as outlined in various proposals, including President Trump’s peace plan in 2020 and the Saudi-French proposal, and can securely and effectively take back control of Gaza.”

The 2020 proposal includes things such as “a constitution … that provides for freedom of press, free and fair elections, respect for human rights for its citizens” and more, as well as “transparent, independent, and credit-worthy financial institutions” and ending incitement. 

Netanyahu said on Fox News’ “Sunday Briefing” that “if all of that is turned on its head, there’s a tremendous transformation … Good luck. Some people believe it happens. I don’t think it’s going to happen.”

The plan also says that the “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood” would only happen “when the PA reform program is faithfully carried out.” Netanyahu appears to be calculating that Ramallah is unlikely to meet those conditions.

That being said, Netanyahu did sign a document that says unequivocally “we recognize [statehood] as the aspiration of the Palestinian people,” which is disturbing to some on the Israeli right, who argue that even acquiescence in principle is a problem.

While there is significant opposition to the plan from the right flank of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, it has been neutralized for now, in that most of the plan will not go to any kind of vote in the Cabinet. Any attempts to bring the government down over it would have to wait three weeks for the Knesset to come back from its recess, and even then they are likely to fail, with some of the opposition offering Netanyahu a “safety net.”

But as Netanyahu heads back to Israel having said “yes,” plenty of doubts remain as to whether this plan will actually be enacted. First, whether Hamas agrees, and then, new questions and challenges every step of the way.

Two Senate Republicans are urging the administration against lifting any sanctions on Iran in absence of real concessions from the regime, following comments from Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff indicating the U.S. had already rolled back some sanctions.

Witkoff, speaking on CNBC on Wednesday, appeared to confirm that President Donald Trump had lifted some oil sanctions on Iran this week, as a signal of cooperation to China and Iran. Trump also said at the NATO summit that Iran would “need money to put that country back into shape. We want to see that happen,” adding, “If they’re going to sell oil, they’re going to sell oil.”

The comments came after Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this week, “China can continue to purchase Oil from Iran” — comments that a senior White House official said did not indicate any policy shift or sanctions relief.

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told Jewish Insider he had heard Trump and Witkoff’s comments and that he was not sure what they were referring to, but said no sanctions should be removed until Iran ends its support for terrorism and guarantees that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors have access to facilities in Iran.

“We’re trying to get additional details, because we’re hearing the sanctions are still there, as well they should be. They still have acts of terrorism. Until we can actually verify that they’ve actually set aside planting terrorism around the region, we need to continue to be able to put pressure on them,” Lankford told JI.

He said the U.S. should not be removing any sanctions at this point, noting, “We can’t verify anything on the ground yet. … They’re literally trying to be able to block out the future [International Atomic Energy Agency] certification,” referring to an Iranian parliament effort to block IAEA inspectors from Iran going forward.

“We know they don’t have the power and the ability to be able to highly enrich uranium at this point, but we don’t have the ability, still, to be able to verify things on the ground,” Lankford continued. “And we have no shift in their policy, as far as we can tell — and certainly not in their charter — on what their stand is for terrorism in the region and to us.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said that sanctions relief should “[depend] on what we get for it. If we get complete denuclearization and a peace between Israel and Iran, that might be worth talking about.”

He said that the U.S. should not remove any sanctions preemptively.

“We should get something for it. Certainly, Iran is back on its heels now, and this is exactly the right time to negotiate some sort of long-standing arrangement,” Cornyn said. “I wouldn’t do anything preemptive.”