In a significant development in international diplomacy, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan have expressed their support for a new initiative proposed by United States President Donald Trump aimed at resolving the nearly two-year-long conflict in the Gaza Strip. The announcements, made on Tuesday, underscore a shared vision for peace in the Middle East, with both nations emphasizing the importance of dialogue, mutual trust, and adherence to international law as critical components of a sustainable resolution. Azerbaijan, in particular, highlighted the necessity of a two-state solution as the cornerstone of any lasting settlement, while Kazakhstan described the plan as a “unique opportunity” to foster peace and stability in the region.
The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry issued a statement via the U.S.-based social media platform X, articulating its position on the Gaza conflict and the newly proposed peace plan. The ministry stressed that achieving a sustainable and just peace requires “sincere commitment, mutual trust, and respect for international law.” It further emphasized that key steps, such as the exchange of prisoners and hostages and addressing the humanitarian needs of the affected population, are essential to build confidence and reduce tensions. These measures, according to Azerbaijan, are vital to paving the way for long-term stabilization and a political settlement that can endure the complexities of the region’s challenges.
The ministry’s statement culminated in a clear endorsement of a two-state solution, asserting that “only through dialogue and goodwill, a long-lasting settlement, with the two-state solution at its core, can be achieved.” This position reflects Azerbaijan’s broader foreign policy approach, which often emphasizes diplomacy, multilateral cooperation, and respect for sovereignty and international norms. By aligning its stance with the principles of international law and dialogue, Azerbaijan positions itself as a constructive player in global efforts to address one of the world’s most intractable conflicts.
Kazakhstan, meanwhile, issued its statement through the press secretary of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Ruslan Zheldibay, via the messaging platform Telegram. The statement quoted President Tokayev, who described Trump’s initiative as a “unique opportunity and a crucial step” toward resolving the protracted conflict in the Middle East. Tokayev’s remarks underscored Kazakhstan’s view that the plan could serve as a catalyst for strengthening interstate trust and establishing a lasting and just peace in the region. Like Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan’s endorsement reflects its commitment to supporting diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts and promote stability on a global scale.
Both nations’ statements come in response to President Trump’s announcement of a comprehensive 20-point ceasefire plan for Gaza, unveiled on Monday during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington, DC. The plan outlines several key provisions aimed at addressing both immediate and long-term challenges in the Gaza conflict. Among the most prominent elements are the release of Israeli captives held in Gaza in exchange for a number of Palestinian prisoners, the disarmament of the Palestinian militant group Hamas, and the establishment of a “technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee” to temporarily govern the Gaza Strip. These measures are intended to create a framework for de-escalation, governance, and eventual reconciliation between the conflicting parties.
The Gaza conflict, which has persisted for nearly two years, has resulted in significant loss of life, widespread destruction, and a deepening humanitarian crisis. The war has drawn international attention and sparked debates over the best path to peace, with various stakeholders advocating for different approaches. The Trump administration’s plan represents a bold attempt to break the deadlock, combining immediate actions—such as prisoner exchanges and humanitarian aid—with longer-term goals like disarmament and governance reform. While the specifics of the plan’s implementation remain subject to negotiation and scrutiny, the endorsements from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan signal early international support for the initiative.
Azerbaijan’s Perspective: A Commitment to Dialogue and International Law
Azerbaijan’s statement is notable for its emphasis on dialogue and goodwill as prerequisites for a lasting resolution. The country’s foreign policy has historically prioritized diplomacy and multilateralism, shaped by its own experiences with conflict and territorial disputes. Azerbaijan’s reference to “sincere commitment, mutual trust, and respect for international law” reflects its broader approach to global issues, where it seeks to promote stability and cooperation. By explicitly endorsing a two-state solution, Azerbaijan aligns itself with a widely supported framework in international diplomacy, which envisions the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state alongside Israel as a means of achieving peace.
The mention of prisoner and hostage exchanges, as well as addressing humanitarian needs, highlights Azerbaijan’s recognition of the immediate challenges in Gaza. The ongoing conflict has exacerbated food insecurity, displacement, and lack of access to basic services for many residents of the Gaza Strip. By emphasizing these issues, Azerbaijan underscores the importance of confidence-building measures that can create a conducive environment for broader political negotiations. Such measures, the ministry suggests, are not merely humanitarian but strategic, as they help reduce tensions and foster trust between the parties involved.
Azerbaijan’s endorsement of the two-state solution also carries symbolic weight. As a nation that has navigated its own complex history of conflict, particularly in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, Azerbaijan brings a unique perspective to the Gaza issue. Its advocacy for dialogue and international law may resonate with other nations in the Global South, which often view the Palestinian question through the lens of sovereignty and self-determination. By positioning itself as a supporter of Trump’s plan, Azerbaijan seeks to contribute to global efforts to resolve the conflict while reinforcing its image as a responsible actor in international affairs.
Kazakhstan’s Perspective: A Step Toward Regional Stability
Kazakhstan’s response, articulated by President Tokayev, frames Trump’s plan as a “unique opportunity” to address not only the Gaza conflict but also broader challenges to stability in the Middle East. Kazakhstan has long pursued a foreign policy that emphasizes neutrality, multilateralism, and conflict resolution, often positioning itself as a mediator in global disputes. Tokayev’s statement reflects this approach, presenting the U.S. initiative as a chance to strengthen interstate trust—a critical factor in a region marked by competing interests and historical rivalries.
The Kazakh president’s description of the plan as a “crucial step” suggests a belief that it could serve as a turning point in the conflict. By focusing on the establishment of a lasting and just peace, Kazakhstan signals its interest in a resolution that addresses the root causes of the Gaza crisis, including issues of governance, security, and economic development. The reference to interstate trust also hints at Kazakhstan’s broader vision for the Middle East, where cooperative relationships between nations could lead to greater regional stability.
Kazakhstan’s endorsement of the plan aligns with its history of supporting international peace initiatives. The country has previously hosted talks on issues such as the Syrian conflict and nuclear non-proliferation, earning a reputation as a neutral venue for diplomacy. By backing Trump’s Gaza plan, Kazakhstan reinforces its role as a supporter of global peace efforts, while also signaling its interest in contributing to solutions for one of the world’s most high-profile conflicts.
The Trump Plan: Key Provisions and Implications
The 20-point ceasefire plan announced by President Trump represents a multifaceted approach to resolving the Gaza conflict. While the full details of the plan have not been publicly disclosed, key elements highlighted during the press conference provide insight into its scope and objectives. The proposed exchange of Israeli captives for Palestinian prisoners addresses one of the most immediate and emotionally charged aspects of the conflict. Previous attempts at such exchanges have been fraught with challenges, but they remain a critical component of any de-escalation effort.
The disarmament of Hamas, the Palestinian group that has controlled Gaza since 2007, is another central pillar of the plan. Hamas’s military capabilities have been a major point of contention in the conflict, with Israel citing its rocket attacks and tunneling activities as security threats. Disarmament would require significant concessions from Hamas, as well as robust verification mechanisms to ensure compliance. The proposal for a “technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee” to govern Gaza temporarily suggests an effort to move away from the current political stalemate, where Hamas’s control has been a sticking point in negotiations.
These provisions, while ambitious, face significant hurdles. The history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is littered with failed peace initiatives, and skepticism abounds regarding the feasibility of Trump’s plan. Critics may argue that the disarmament of Hamas and the establishment of a new governing body could be seen as favoring Israeli interests, potentially alienating Palestinian stakeholders. Additionally, the lack of clarity on how the two-state solution fits into the plan’s framework raises questions about its alignment with international consensus.
Nevertheless, the endorsements from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan provide a degree of international legitimacy to the initiative. Their support could encourage other nations, particularly in the Global South and the Islamic world, to engage with the plan and contribute to its implementation. The involvement of diverse actors in the peace process is critical, as it broadens the coalition of stakeholders and increases the likelihood of a sustainable outcome.
The Broader Context: Gaza and the Quest for Peace
The Gaza conflict, which intensified nearly two years ago, is part of a broader Israeli-Palestinian struggle that has persisted for decades. The Gaza Strip, a densely populated coastal enclave, has been under blockade by Israel and Egypt since Hamas took control in 2007, leading to severe restrictions on movement, trade, and access to resources. Periodic escalations of violence, including airstrikes, rocket attacks, and ground incursions, have caused immense suffering for civilians on both sides.
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza has been a focal point of international concern. According to reports from organizations like the United Nations, the enclave faces acute shortages of food, water, and medical supplies, with much of its infrastructure damaged or destroyed. The war has also displaced thousands of residents, exacerbating an already dire situation. Addressing these humanitarian needs, as highlighted by Azerbaijan, is a critical step toward building the trust necessary for political negotiations.
The two-state solution, endorsed by Azerbaijan and supported by much of the international community, envisions the establishment of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, alongside a secure Israel. While this framework has been a cornerstone of peace efforts since the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, progress has been stymied by issues such as settlement expansion, security concerns, and disagreements over borders and refugees. Trump’s plan, by emphasizing immediate actions like prisoner exchanges and governance reform, seeks to create momentum for broader negotiations, but its success will depend on the willingness of all parties to engage in good faith.
The Role of International Actors
The endorsements from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan highlight the importance of international involvement in the Gaza peace process. As nations with growing influence in their respective regions, both countries bring unique perspectives to the table. Azerbaijan, with its strategic position in the South Caucasus and its ties to both the Islamic world and Western partners, is well-placed to advocate for a balanced approach to the conflict. Kazakhstan, with its history of mediation and its role in Central Asia, adds a voice of neutrality and pragmatism to the conversation.
The support of these nations could also signal a broader shift in how the international community engages with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In recent years, there has been growing interest in diversifying the actors involved in peace efforts, moving beyond traditional Western mediators to include countries from the Global South and emerging powers. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan’s endorsements may encourage other nations to take a more active role, potentially creating a more inclusive and representative process.
Moreover, the involvement of countries like Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan underscores the interconnected nature of global security. The Gaza conflict, while rooted in the Middle East, has implications for international stability, trade, and diplomacy. By expressing their support for Trump’s plan, these nations signal their recognition of the conflict’s broader significance and their commitment to contributing to a resolution.
Challenges and Opportunities Ahead
While the endorsements from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are a positive development, the road to peace in Gaza remains fraught with challenges. The Trump plan, like previous initiatives, must navigate a complex web of political, security, and humanitarian issues. Key questions remain: How will Hamas respond to the proposal for disarmament? Can a technocratic committee effectively govern Gaza in the interim? And how will the international community ensure that humanitarian aid reaches those in need without being politicized?
The success of the plan will also depend on the engagement of other major stakeholders, including Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and regional powers like Egypt, Jordan, and Qatar. The United States, as the plan’s architect, will need to balance its role as a mediator with its historical alignment with Israel, ensuring that the process is perceived as fair by all parties.
For Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, their endorsements represent an opportunity to enhance their diplomatic profiles and contribute to a global issue of immense importance. By advocating for dialogue, international law, and a two-state solution, they align themselves with the aspirations of the international community while also asserting their relevance in global affairs.
Conclusion
The endorsements of Trump’s Gaza peace plan by Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan mark a significant moment in the international response to the conflict. Azerbaijan’s call for dialogue, goodwill, and a two-state solution, coupled with Kazakhstan’s view of the plan as a “unique opportunity,” reflects a shared commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. While the plan faces significant challenges, the support of these nations underscores the importance of international cooperation in addressing one of the world’s most enduring conflicts. As the process unfolds, the global community will be watching closely to see whether this initiative can deliver the lasting and just peace that both Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan envision.