Gaza Peace Paradox: Too Late the Hero

On Monday 17 November 2025, the UN Security Council passed a US-sponsored resolution, which backs US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for ending Israel’s war on Gaza.  In theory, this security body will work with Israel and Egypt to “demilitarise” the Gaza Strip and will reportedly train a Palestinian police force. It was passed with a 13-0 vote. But Russia and China abstained, expressing concern over the lack of Palestinian participation in the force and the lack of a clear role for the UN in the future of Gaza. Hamas rejected the resolution saying the vote “imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip”. Under Trump’s plan, Hamas would have no role in Gaza and would be disarmed, with its personnel offered two options: either commit to coexistence or be granted safe passage out of Gaza. Hamas has repeatedly said it would give up governance but is not willing to give up its arms.

For his part, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said recently that the war “has not ended” and that Hamas would be disarmed. In Israel, the resolution led at least one opposition party to lambaste Netanyahu’s government.“What happened tonight at the UN is a result of the Israeli government’s failed conduct,” Avigdor Lieberman, an ultra nationalist politician who leads the Yisrael Beytenu party, wrote on X. “The decision led to a Palestinian state, a Saudi nuclear [programme] and F-35 planes for Turkey and Saudi Arabia.”

Despite the UN Security Council’s partial approval of US-drafted resolution and  endorsement of POTUS Donald Trump’s ‘peace plan’ for Gaza, which raises more questions than answers; and Palestinian dissent to many of its stated aims and objectives foreclose chances of a lasting peace to the occupied territories of Palestine. For example, the ISF( International Stabilisation Force) will not act as a UN peacekeeping force; it will work in ‘consultation’ with Israel and Egypt. Moreover, the language about a path to Palestinian statehood is ambiguous. On the other hand, the Israeli prime minister has reaffirmed his commitment to blocking a Palestinian state. Meanwhile, Hamas is questioning the ISF’s neutrality. The resolution calls for the ISF to demilitarise Gaza, while the US ambassador to the UN has said the ISF will “support a region free from Hamas’ grip”. These statements clearly indicate that foreign troops will be deployed in Gaza to engage and disarm Hamas. Pakistan, and other Muslim states that are reportedly considering troops for the mission, must therefore be clear about what is expected of them.

Above in view, all those Muslim countries including Pakistan induced to  consider  troops’ deployment as the international stabilisation force need to analyse this precarious option from all angles. The moot point is as to why did USA and its Western allies acting as “Hand in Glove”, continued to support Israel’s genocide of Palestinian Muslims including starvation war and total destruction of Gaza and culminating it with fulfillment of old “USA’s Farcical Peace Plan”, is happily accepted by the known Muslim countries without qualms? Doesn’t it tantamount to washing American & Israeli dirty linen by the submissive Muslim States taking false pride in playing an ambiguous role in bringing so called peace in Gaza that continues to face incessant Israeli atrociousness? Why did the UNO/UNSC remain inert instead of deploying Blue Beret Peace enforcers and Peacekeepers to stop US sponsored racial extermination in Palestine/ Gaza in the last two years? Why did the militarily and economically powerful Muslim countries do nothing to stop holocaust of Muslims in Palestine and  total annihilation of Gaza?

The role played by USA/Allies, Israel, UNO and now a few hypocritically jubilant and fallaciously proud Muslim countries and their leadership remind me of a 1970 American war film, “Too Late the Hero”: ‘During World War -II, an Allied forces interpreter is called on by his superior for a dangerous mission, who up to this point,  had managed to completely avoid combat. But now he must team up with some equally reluctant British soldiers, and travel into perilous jungle territory to destroy a Japanese communications base. The men must now face the once unthinkable prospect of becoming heroes. The mission for all purposes is impossible..’.   "Too late the hero" is not a standard idiom, but a phrase that can be understood as being about a hero who arrives too late to save the day, or a hero who has "lived long enough to become the villain," as also popularized by the movie ’The Dark Knight’. It can also be interpreted as a heroic act performed at the wrong time to be effective, which is similar to the idiom "too little, too late," meaning an action was insufficient and occurred after it was too late to make a difference. 

Well that is the paradox faced by the Muslim countries elicited by POTUS Trump by mere inflated praise or by impalpable coercion; but never ever leaving a chance to make billions and trillions of dollars for US as well as for his family business. Prudence demands that instead of blindly falling victim to mercurial Mr. Trump’s momentary praises, being reciprocated with hyperbolic statements and ‘more loyal than the king’ behaviour, faced with multi-front threats, Pakistan’s decision makers should act act farsighted and stand firmly on the longstanding moral high grounds on Palestine and IIOJ&K.