Since taking office in January, Trump has upended U.S. foreign policy, slashing foreign aid, imposing tariffs on friend and foe alike and cultivating warmer – if volatile – relations with Russia.

At the same time he has sought, so far with only limited success, to solve some of the world’s most intractable conflicts.

Some 150 heads of state or government are expected to address the chamber this week, including Trump, who is the second scheduled speaker after the session opens at 9 a.m. EDT (1300 GMT).

Trump will speak eight months into a second term marked by severe aid cuts that have sparked humanitarian worries and have raised doubts about the U.N.’s future, prompting U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to try to trim costs and improve efficiency.

White House officials have yet to provide guidance on what Trump will say.

But according to planning documents reviewed by Reuters, the Trump administration plans to call this week for sharply narrowing the right to asylum, seeking to undo the post-World War Two framework around humanitarian protection.

Trump’s more restrictive stance would include requiring asylum-seekers to claim protection in the first country they enter, not a nation of their choosing, a State Department spokesperson said.

Guterres and Trump are expected to meet formally for the first time since Trump returned to office in January.

Trump describes the U.N. as having “great potential” but says it has to get its “act together.” He has maintained the same wary stance on multilateralism that was a hallmark of his first term from 2017 to 2021 and also accused the world body of failing to help him try to broker peace in various conflicts.

Calls For a Palestinian State

The General Assembly takes place as the war between Israel and Hamas approaches its second anniversary on October 7. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due the address the General Assembly on Friday.

Dozens of world leaders gathered on Monday to embrace a Palestinian state, a landmark diplomatic shift that faces fierce resistance from Israel and its close ally the United States.

The most far-right government in Israel’s history has declared there will be no Palestinian state as it pushes on with its fight against militant group Hamas in Gaza following the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel that killed some 1,200 people.

Israel has drawn global condemnation over its military conduct in Gaza, where more than 65,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to local health authorities.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will also address the General Assembly.

The development signals a potential shift in the group’s posture amid increasing diplomatic momentum and heightened security concerns for its leadership.

Among those reportedly ordered to disarm are high-ranking figures central to Hamas’s military, financial, and diplomatic operations:

Khalil al-Hayya, head of Hamas’s negotiating delegation,

Zaher Jabarin, the group’s chief financier, and

Muhammad Ismail Darwish, head of the religious council and liaison to Turkey and Iran.

According to Israeli media outlet Ynet, al-Hayya, who has been a key figure in hostage negotiations, has become acutely concerned for his safety since Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz publicly named him as the next assassination target.

These fears have reportedly influenced al-Hayya’s stance at the negotiation table. Insiders say he has now expressed openness to the latest ceasefire draft and is no longer opposing a temporary truce—a marked departure from earlier Hamas demands for a total end to the war before any hostage release.

Qatar’s reported demand that al-Hayya and his security team surrender their weapons has further deepened his sense of vulnerability. Analysts suggest that this disarmament may improve the chances of Hamas accepting the proposed ceasefire, which includes phased hostage releases in exchange for a halt in hostilities.

Israeli officials have expressed cautious optimism. “There is cause for hope,” a senior official in Jerusalem said, echoing similar sentiments from international diplomats who believe that a resolution may finally be within reach.

“There’s a big opportunity right now,” one diplomat briefed on the negotiations told the Associated Press. “The signals we’re getting show that people are ready.”

The diplomat added that former U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent sharp criticism of Israel has inadvertently emboldened Hamas by suggesting that Washington may now act as a more assertive guarantor in any future deal—something Hamas has long demanded.

Meanwhile, sources close to Hamas told Saudi daily Al Akhbar that the group was “satisfied” with new language added to the ceasefire proposal. The updated version reportedly includes stronger guarantees to end the war—an essential condition for Hamas to accept any deal.

A formal response from Hamas is expected by Friday. However, the nature and scope of American guarantees remain undisclosed.

Israeli officials have downplayed the significance of these foreign assurances.

“Israel is not bound by commitments made by the United States or any mediator,” one official stated.

True commitment to justice means standing with all oppressed people, regardless of faith—not just those who resemble us.

The Palestinian struggle has metamorphosed from a national liberation movement into a cause increasingly espoused by Islamists of all hues and ideologies. While it remains deeply emotional and significant for Muslims worldwide, this shift has introduced confusion—especially when difficult questions are raised about the political and ideological framing of the issue.

The narrative that Islamist intellectuals have carefully constructed begins to collapse like a house of cards when confronted with uncomfortable questions—questions often left unanswered or deliberately obscured. But why ask such questions at all? Isn’t this just whataboutery?

Yes, it can be. But when used sincerely, whataboutery is a way to scratch the bottom and understand a position that one was trying to hide behind large words and sophisticated vocabulary.

Since October 7, many Muslims have declared, “To stand with Gaza is to stand with humanity.” This frames the Palestinian struggle as a universal moral issue—transcending religion and nation. Yet in the same breath, many ask, “Where are the Arab and Muslim countries?”

Wait—if this is a humanitarian crisis, why appeal to Arab regimes that are openly complicit with imperialist powers? And if the call is rooted in ummah and religious solidarity, then why invoke the language of universal humanity?

At the rhetorical level, it’s about “humanity”; but at a deeper level, it’s clearly framed as a crisis of the ummah, to the exclusion of others. The contradiction reveals a fundamental confusion—not just about Palestine, but about many critical questions facing Muslims today.

Should Israel be opposed as part of religious faith or for its actions in Gaza? The answer, often, is both. Is the Jewish people an eternal enemy, or is the enmity grounded in the ongoing genocide against Palestinians? The line is blurred.

Many cheer when Israelis—soldiers or civilians—are killed, making no moral distinction. The now-viral meme “Of course I support LGBT: Let’s Go Bomb Tel Aviv” is not just tasteless; it’s a genocidal fantasy, echoing cries for a second Holocaust. Forget soldiers—there is often no concern even for Israeli children, while outrage for Palestinian children is rightfully widespread.

This selective empathy, this moral hypocrisy, stains the integrity of the cause. And unless we confront it honestly, we risk replacing one injustice with another.

Not all people living in Israel, and certainly not all Jewish people, are complicit in the “genocide”. There are Jewish voices who have spoken-up against Israel’s far-right groups. But where are the Muslim equivalents of such Jewish voices? Where are the visible Jewish-Muslim brotherhood platforms actively resisting antisemitism and calling for hating the oppression and not the jewish people in letter and Spirit?

The increasing Islamization of the Palestinian cause has effectively narrowed the space for such solidarity to emerge from the Muslim side. Instead of expanding the struggle into a broader coalition for justice, it has been boxed into religious identity and issue—shrinking the possibility of building alliances that transcends faith and can talk about pressing issues .

Muslims must reconsider the nature of their solidarity—moving beyond a reaction rooted solely in religious identity. Instead of supporting the Palestinian cause merely because the victims are co-religionists, solidarity must be grounded in a deeper, more critical and humane response to human suffering.

True commitment to justice means standing with all oppressed people, regardless of faith—not just those who resemble us. Communalizing the struggle not only weakens its moral foundation but also isolates it from broader global movements for justice.

The Palestinian cause—and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict—deserves to be part of a larger, more inclusive struggle for dignity, freedom, and shared humanity, rising above narrow religious or cultural divisions toward a just future for both peoples.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

The plan, reportedly backed by US President Donald Trump and coordinated with Egypt and Qatar, outlines a phased truce that would begin with the release of 28 Israeli hostages—both alive and deceased—within the first week. In exchange, Israel would release 125 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences, along with the return of the remains of 180 Palestinians killed during the conflict.

According to the proposal, humanitarian aid shipments would begin flowing into the besieged Gaza Strip immediately upon Hamas’ endorsement of the ceasefire agreement.

The next stage of the plan includes the release of the remaining 30 Israeli hostages after a permanent ceasefire is secured. The White House confirmed Thursday that Israel has agreed to the terms outlined in the proposal, marking a potential breakthrough in negotiations that have remained stalled for months.

Deep Disputes Remain

Hamas, which has been reviewing the proposal, is expected to issue a response by Friday or Saturday. Despite hopes of progress, significant gaps remain between both sides.

Israel has maintained that it will not agree to a permanent ceasefire unless Hamas is fully dismantled and disarmed, and all hostages are returned. Hamas, however, has consistently rejected demands to surrender its weapons and has insisted on a complete Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war.

War’s Heavy Toll

The conflict began after Hamas launched a surprise assault on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing approximately 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli figures. In response, Israel initiated a massive military campaign in Gaza that has since claimed the lives of more than 54,000 Palestinians, according to health authorities in the enclave.

The war has devastated Gaza, leaving large swathes in ruins and displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians. Humanitarian organizations continue to warn of catastrophic conditions, especially amid limited access to medical care, clean water, and essential supplies.

Next Steps

While the US proposal marks one of the most detailed plans for a cessation of hostilities to date, success hinges on Hamas’ acceptance and the ability of mediators to bridge the core disagreements. International observers are watching closely to see whether this ceasefire plan will finally bring an end to one of the deadliest conflicts in the region’s recent history.