Current Affairs

UN Security Council (UNSC) Adopts US Resolution on Trump’s Gaza Plan

Author: VisionIAS Editorial Team

Nov 18, 2025Current Affairs7 min read

UN Security Council (UNSC) Adopts US Resolution on Trump’s Gaza Plan

The UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted a U.S.-drafted resolution endorsing President Trump’s Gaza peace plan and authorizing a stabilization force.

On November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted a US drafted resolution endorsing President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza. The resolution, numbered 2803 (2025), passed with 13 votes in favor and none against, though permanent members China and Russia abstained.

This development marks a shift in the international approach to the Gaza conflict, which has devastated the region for over two years since Hamas’s attack on Israel in October 2023.

Table of Contents

Understanding Trump Gaza Plan and UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2803

The UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution endorses the “Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict,” known as the Trump Gaza plan or the 20 point plan. This framework was announced by President Trump on September 29, 2025, and represents an attempt to transition Gaza from a conflict zone to a viable entity.

The Trump Gaza plan operates in a phased manner.

The first phase established a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel in early October 2025, involving the release of hostages held by Hamas in exchange for Palestinian detainees and a partial withdrawal of Israeli Defense Forces from Gaza.
The subsequent phases focus on demilitarization, transitional governance, and reconstruction efforts designed to transform Gaza into what the plan describes as a “deradicalized terror-free zone.”

In addition to these phased measures, the 20-point plan outlines a detailed roadmap for rebuilding Gaza’s institutional and economic foundations. It calls for the rapid restoration of electricity, water systems, hospitals, and schools through internationally supervised aid channels.

A key provision is the creation of a special economic zone to attract investment and generate employment, helping to stabilize Gaza’s economy. Governance reforms also feature prominently: a temporary technocratic administration will manage civil affairs, while the Board of Peace oversees reconstruction funds and transparency mechanisms.

The plan further integrates regional actors particularly neighbouring Arab states to support border security, aid delivery, and long-term stabilisation, ensuring Gaza’s transition is anchored in broader regional cooperation.

Board of Peace (BoP)

The resolution welcomes the establishment of the Board of Peace as Gaza’s transitional administration. Chaired by President Trump himself, this body will coordinate reconstruction efforts, oversee economic recovery, and guide Gaza toward reformed Palestinian governance. The BoP is granted authority until December 2027, after which control is intended to transfer to a reformed Palestinian Authority.

The BoP will oversee a technocratic Palestinian committee responsible for day-to-day administration, attempting to fill the governance vacuum with personnel untainted by either the compromised Palestinian Authority or Hamas. The resolution encourages international financial support, requesting the World Bank to establish a donor-governed trust fund dedicated to Gaza’s redevelopment.

International Stabilization Force (ISF)

The resolution authorizes the BoP to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force operating under unified command. The ISF’s mandate encompasses several responsibilities.

The force will stabilize the security environment and secure Gaza’s borders while protecting civilians and supporting humanitarian assistance flow. The ISF is tasked with supporting Gaza’s demilitarization, including the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups, dismantling terrorist infrastructure, and training vetted Palestinian police units.

Countries contributing personnel will do so in close consultation with Egypt and Israel. The US envisions deploying the first ISF contingents by January 2026. Potential contributors include Azerbaijan, Egypt, Indonesia, Qatar, and Turkey, though the force will not be a UN operation despite requiring a UN mandate for legitimacy.

Stakeholder Reactions: Divisions and Implementation Challenges

Hamas’s Rejection

The resolution was rejected by Hamas, which argued it was inadequate with respect to the rights and needs of Palestinians. Furthermore, Hamas objected to the resolution’s attempt to establish an international administration or trusteeship over the territory.

Hamas criticized the ISF’s mandate, arguing that assigning the international force the task of disarming resistance groups “strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favour of the occupation.” Hamas condemned the framework as imposing “an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which our people and their factions reject.”

Israel’s Internal Contradictions

While the US is Israel’s ally and the plan secured a ceasefire, the resolution generated controversy within Israel. PM Benjamin Netanyahu maintained Israel’s opposition to a Palestinian state, even as he pledged to demilitarize Gaza. The friction centers on the resolution’s language referencing Palestinian self determination and statehood, provisions that members of Netanyahu’s government oppose.

Arab States’ Conditional Support

Arab governments provided diplomatic support for the resolution, but with reservations. They insisted that contributing troops to Gaza’s stabilization required a clear political horizon toward Palestinian statehood.

However, Arab states remain hesitant to commit soldiers. The UAE has refused to supply troops without a clearer legal framework, while Israel has vetoed Turkey’s participation in the force.

Conclusion

The adoption of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2803 endorsing the Trump Gaza plan represents an international attempt to resolve one of the world’s most difficult conflicts. While the resolution provides multilateral legitimacy and establishes mechanisms for transitional governance and security, its success hinges on reconciling objectives among key stakeholders.

The major obstacles to implementation are Hamas’s rejection, Israel’s objection to Palestinian statehood, and the conditional backing from Arab nations. The international community now faces the challenge of transforming this political framework into a durable peace that addresses both Israeli security concerns and Palestinian aspirations for self determination.