The conference analyzed the so-called "Gaza Plan," emphasizing its lack of clarity and structure. According to the speakers, the plan was not fully developed, had no timeline, and lacked concrete implementation mechanisms. It emerged mainly under pressure from the United States, reflecting Washington's continued dominance in Middle Eastern diplomacy. However, without infrastructure or coordination, the plan remains fragile and unlikely to be fully implemented—perhaps only its first phase might see partial realization.

The Speakers noted that while the mere existence of a plan marks a modest improvement compared to the previous situation, the overall outlook remains pessimistic. Historically, plans in the Middle East are rarely implemented as intended, and this one appears no different. It foresees major steps such as Israeli withdrawal, but these are improbable under current political conditions.

The discussion also addressed the European role, or rather its absence. European states were described as too slow and fragmented to act as a coherent bloc. It took them two years to even engage in dialogue about the crisis, and when they did, their involvement was limited to bilateral humanitarian efforts rather than collective political action. It is possible to argue that Europe has "abdicated" from being a key player in the regime . While it traditionally played a secondary role to the US, in the last it did so by demonstrating a degree of agency and initiative. Today that role seems gone, with Europe content to stay behind the United States, supporting Washington's agenda instead of shaping its own.

Turning to the regional balance of power, the plan highlights the continued predominance of the United States, that remains the only actor capable of exerting real leverage. The Trump administration, in particular, was described as uniquely positioned because it faced little domestic opposition, enabling it to apply pressure—though it remains doubtful that Trump or any U.S. leader will ensure full implementation.

The seminar also explored the Israeli and Palestinian contexts. Israel and Palestine remain deeply traumatized by recent conflicts, and there is little internal debate about long-term political solutions such as sovereignty or statehood. In Israel, the opposition offers no clear direction, and the West Bank's situation remains fragile due to ongoing settlement expansion.

Two competing regional narratives were discussed: one portraying Israel as a new hegemonic power, and the other viewing it as a revisionist and destabilizing actor, replacing Iran in that role. It was then argued that the Middle East today is relatively balanced—Israel is militarily and technologically dominant but isolated, failing to understand its regional environment. Iran, by contrast, suffers from military and economic weaknesses but compensates through patience and ideological resilience.

Finally, the debate returned to Europe's new perspective: since the war in Ukraine, European foreign policy sees the Middle East through the lens of Russia–Iran relations, weakening its independent approach. Although Europe briefly adopted sanctions in response to Gaza, the new plan once again allows it to retreat to its "comfort zone" of reconstruction rather than political engagement.

---

hosted by Professor Nathalie Tocci


NATHALIE TOCCI

Nathalie Tocci is Professor of the Practice at SAIS Europe and Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali. She is also an independent non-executive director of the multi-utility company Acea. She has been Special Advisor to EU High Representatives Federica Mogherini and Josep Borrell. In that capacity, she wrote the European Global Strategy and worked on its implementation. She is Europe's Futures fellow at the Institute for Human Sciences (Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen, IWM). She was Pierre Keller Visiting Professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and, prior to joining Acea, she was independent board member first of Edison and then of Eni. She has held research positions at the Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels, the Transatlantic Academy, Washington, the European University Institute, Florence, and has taught at the College of Europe, Bruges. Her research interests include European integration and European foreign policy, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, transatlantic relations, multilateralism, conflict resolution, energy, climate and defense. Nathalie is a regular columnist on The Guardian and La Stampa, as well as being a regular panelist on BBC's "The Context". She has published in Foreign Affairs, Politico, Financial Times, El Pais, Project Syndicate, and is often interviewed by all major international television and newspaper outlets.

SANAM VAKIL

Sanam Vakil is the James Anderson Adjunct Professor at The Johns Hopkins University SAIS Europe, and Director of Chatham House's Middle East and North Africa Programme. Previously she was the deputy director and a senior research fellow in the programme. Sanam leads the Iran Forum project focusing on future trends in Iran's domestic and foreign policy and follows GCC and Gulf Arab dynamics alongside wider regional security issues in the Middle East. Sanam has been a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University associated with the Working Group on Islamism and the International Order. Before these appointments, from 2003-2005, Sanam was an assistant professor of Middle East Studies at SAIS Washington. She served as a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations also providing research analysis to the World Bank's Middle East and North Africa department. Sanam provides research, commentary and political risk analysis for companies and organizations working in the Middle East. She has been consulted by high ranking government officials in the United States and Europe. Vakil holds a PhD in international relations from SAIS. Professor Vakil is the author of numerous monographs, book reviews, working papers and articles in U.S. and international journals on Middle East and U.S. foreign policy.