Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor and a foreign affairs columnist at POLITICO Europe.

After much bullying, cajoling and coaxing by U.S. President Donald Trump and Gulf state leaders, the tentative deal between Israel and Hamas seems on track to end the war in Gaza.

And Trump deserves a bow — or, rather, half of one. We shouldn’t get ahead of ourselves.

According to the first phase of the deal, 20 Israeli hostages held by Hamas and allied militant groups will soon, possibly this weekend, be on their way home. The relentless Israeli military campaign that’s razed much of the coastal enclave will cease, bringing relief to despairing Gazans. And both Palestinians and the relatives of Israeli hostages are rightly celebrating.

Indeed, blessed are the peacemakers — although, many Trump detractors, such as Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, have noticeably failed to praise the U.S. president by name. Kaja Kallas, Europe’s top diplomat, didn’t mention Trump in her first reaction either, writing: “The agreement on the first phase of the Gaza peace deal marks a significant breakthrough. This is a major diplomatic accomplishment.” And even some top U.S. Democrats held back from singling him out for what is a notable achievement.

As the president himself might say: “SAD.”

But make no mistake, Trump’s role in this deal was outsized. Not so much for his threats to down hellfire on Hamas if the militant group failed to sign on the dotted line — after all, how much worse could the devastation in Gaza really get? But the pressure he put on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was key.

Ever the diplomatic master-manipulator, Netanyahu has a track record of outmaneuvering and defying U.S. presidents and secretaries of state. But this time, he was the one pushed into a corner. As independent Israeli negotiator Gershon Baskin reminds us, much of the first phase of Trump’s deal was on offer more than a year ago, when former U.S. President Joe Biden was in office, but that the Israeli leader rejected it, gambling that Trump would win the election. Biden had pushed Netanyahu to end the campaign in Gaza for months to little avail.

With Trump then in office, the Israeli leader appeared able to exploit and anticipate the impulsive dealmaker’s reactions and maneuver him down whatever track he wanted, like when it came to Iran. But according to Netanyahu’s former longtime aide Nadav Shtrauchler, the Israeli leader also knows when to compromise with Trump.

That tipping point came when Netanyahu mounted a strike against Hamas leadership in Qatar, a U.S. ally. Trump publicly scolded Netanyahu for his overreach, saying the strike “does not advance Israel or America’s goals,” and that he felt “very badly” about the attack. He also complained online that he was notified too late to stop the strike, that “this was a decision made by Prime Minister Netanyahu, it was not a decision made by me.”

As this column suggested in May, Netanyahu would risk a problem with Trump if he endangered the U.S. president’s bigger diplomatic agenda of resets and mega commercial deals in the Gulf. And the Qatar raid crossed that line — hence, Trump prompting Netanyahu to call Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani to apologize.

And as Israel grew increasingly isolated internationally, with even stalwart Western allies turning against it and clubbing together to recognize a Palestinian state, Netanyahu  could hardly keep disregarding Trump’s impatience for the guns to fall silent. (Neither could Hamas risk alienating Gulf leaders to be left with just Iran’s support.)

The U.S. leader “locked Netanyahu into the agreement, and the Qataris, Egyptians and Turks locked Hamas into the agreement,” Baskin said. “President Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.”

So, then why only half a bow for the U.S. leader?

At the time of writing, the first phase of the deal still appears to be on track. That means the fighting stops, the 20 living Israeli hostages will be returned home, Israeli forces are already withdrawing from Gaza’s main cities, and humanitarian aid will soon surge into the enclave. Israel will also free nearly 2,000 Palestinian detainees — although there are still difficult ongoing negotiations over who will be included on the list.

So far, so good.

But it’s the deal’s second phase — the bigger, longer-term deal that’s meant to bring lasting peace to the region — which is fraught with risks and pitfalls with much still to be agreed, let alone implemented.

Trump’s 20-point plan is a variation on both a scheme proposed by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the 2019 Peace to Prosperity plan drafted by Jared Kushner, his son-in-law. It provides a framework for interim postwar governance, security and reconstruction in Gaza. But it differs from the Oslo Peace process by not attempting to set up a Palestinian state, or defining what land will be Israel’s and what territory will comprise Palestine.

The overarching idea is that over time, Gazans will see their lives improve economically and have a vested interest in peace. Likewise, Israelis will see they can coexist with Palestinians as peaceful neighbors and not fear for their safety or the survival of their state. Under the plan, Gaza will be rebuilt and governed by a technocratic administration overseen by a peace board chaired by Trump and other notables including Blair, with some Palestinian representation. 

A demilitarized Hamas will have no role in governance. Security in Gaza will be handled by a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF), which will “train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces,” while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will “progressively hand over” territory to the ISF.

But questions abound as thorny issues, including where the money to rebuild Gaza will come from and the timetable for Hamas to disarm, still haven’t been finalized. Nor is it clear which countries will contribute to the ISF, and who will have overriding security control between the two forces when things go wrong.

According to Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative, the plan contains elements that are “anathema” to both Israel and Hamas. “Hamas does not want to disarm and give up a role in Palestine’s future,” she said. “And Israel does not want to withdraw completely from the Gaza Strip, allow the Palestinian Authority to return, or agree to an eventual Palestinian state.”

In short, the plan doesn’t advance self-determination for Palestinians, with economic development prioritized over political progress.

It is “too early to speak of peace,” said Hugh Lovatt of the 
European Council on Foreign Relations. “The key to a successful ceasefire is whether the plans can really be implemented and both sides keep their part of the deal.” Noting that many questions remain unanswered, he added that international support should be “conditioned on Israel’s explicit acceptance of a full withdrawal from Gaza and commitment to a genuine political pathway. Without this, the process will likely unravel.”

Moreover, Hamas’ intentions remain questionable, said Michael Milshtein, a Tel Aviv University academic and former head of the Palestinian division of Israel’s military intelligence. “Hamas leaders have been saying in the last few hours that they will never give up their weapons. And when it comes to the board of peace that will rule Gaza, they’re making it clear that in reality there will only be Palestinian regime in Gaza, and they will call the shots,” he told POLITICO.

“The important thing from the Hamas point of view is they survived after two years of the toughest conflict ever between Israel and the Palestinians,” Milshtein added. “Even after their high casualty rate and the destruction of their arsenal, they will remain the dominant player in Gaza. And behind the scenes, even if they’re not the official authority, they will still be the dominant player in Gaza, much like Hezbollah in Lebanon.”

Meanwhile, he fears radical Israeli settlers will continue to push for more settlements in the West Bank, further weakening the Palestinian Authority to the benefit of Hamas.