On September 29, 2025, US President Donald Trump, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, unveiled a 20-point peace plan for Gaza during a press conference at the White House. Trump optimistically claimed that this plan guarantees an end to the war and the freedom of all captives.
Later, on October 3, Hamas announced partial acceptance of the plan, demanding the release of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Israeli captives, along with changes in Gaza’s administration and a disarmament process. Following continuous negotiations and mediation efforts, Hamas announced on Thursday that a final agreement had been reached. As of Friday, Israeli occupation forces began withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, and displaced Palestinians started returning to their homes.
Although these developments are seen as a significant step toward peace, many analysts still warn that Israel may violate the terms of the deal.
In this regard, Mehr News conducted an interview with Mustafa Kaya, Deputy Chairman of Turkey’s Islamist Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi) and a member of the Turkish Parliament. Below is the full text of the interview:
The agreements reached in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, last Thursday regarding Trump’s plan include three key points: the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, allowing humanitarian aid into the enclave, and prisoner exchange. This means we are still in the initial phase of the plan, and the disarmament of Hamas has not yet taken place. Could this issue become a major challenge in the next stages? Given Israel’s past record of violating ceasefires, is there a possibility that this deal will also be broken?
First and foremost, it must be understood that Israel has failed to achieve its military and political goals. It has become almost completely isolated in the eyes of the world and, eventually, due to the global impact of humanitarian aid convoys, was forced to negotiate.
It’s noteworthy that Hamas has declared it will only hand over its weapons to a Palestinian state. Israel, which knows no boundaries, is highly likely to violate this agreement. However, the terms of this ceasefire differ from previous ones, as a special monitoring group will supervise its implementation.
Even so, the risk remains—but time will tell how this situation unfolds.
While the Zionist regime was preparing to launch operations to occupy Gaza, it surprisingly accepted Trump’s plan. Many analysts see Israel’s recent attacks as a strategic failure, arguing that the regime gained nothing from them. The same regime that sought to annihilate Hamas eventually waited for Hamas to accept Trump’s peace plan. How do you interpret this?
Israel is, in essence, in a bind. While it hoped to expand its territory through the Abraham Accords, it instead found itself increasingly isolated—even resorting to attacking neighboring states. International courts have branded it as a genocidal and terrorist entity.
Some countries have even announced that they would arrest Netanyahu if he entered their territory. Even Trump himself has spoken about the rise of anti-Israel sentiment among US Republicans.
For these reasons, Israel may have sought to buy time through this agreement. But the real work begins now. Every move Israel makes must be closely monitored.
It was evident that Trump aspired to win the Nobel Peace Prize by ending the Gaza war and resolving tensions between Azerbaijan and Armenia. But he was not awarded. Can the US president still pursue the Gaza peace process and ensure both sides remain committed to it?
Trump behaves like a corporate CEO—he wants to run his country like a company. He may have realized the financial damage caused by growing anti-Israel sentiment in the Persian Gulf and around the world and therefore pushed for this agreement.
He also calculated that the ongoing conflict would drain US resources and harm his country’s competition with China and Russia. Ultimately, he will choose to stand with Israel—but for now, he’s making statements aimed at advancing this plan.
Whatever the outcome, the US-Israel alliance is not just regional but global, and it plays a decisive role in both America’s foreign and domestic policies.
After the Al-Aqsa Storm operation, the Palestinian cause was no longer seen merely as an Arab or Islamic issue but as one of the most critical humanitarian crises of our time. The Sumud Flotilla was a clear example of this. Some members of the Felicity Party, including MPs, also took part in the mission. What is your view on this?
Genocide has three dimensions—ethnic, religious, and political. If the goal is to eliminate a community across these dimensions, it constitutes genocide. Israel has carried out all of them in Gaza.
Moreover, Israel has used blockade and starvation as tools of genocide. Initiatives like the Sumud and Freedom Flotilla have awakened the conscience of humanity in response to this situation.
The participation of our parliament members in such missions is the clearest expression of our rejection of Israel’s inhumane blockade.
MNA/6618315
Your Comment