Germany’s former Secretary General of the OSCE and previously the European External Action Service, Helga Schmid, has cautiously welcomed recent US-led efforts to secure the release of hostages and provide humanitarian relief in Gaza, while simultaneously highlighting the precariousness of lasting peace prospects in the region. Schmid’s endorsement of President Donald Trump’s “20-point plan” as detailed in an interview with “Der Spiegel”, represents a surprising and potentially contentious remark given traditionally critical European views on Trump’s foreign policy approach.
Schmid emphasized the plan’s immediate success in facilitating the return of remaining hostages to Israel and alleviating some of the suffering endured by the civilian population within Gaza. She asserted that this achievement warrants recognition, underscoring the crucial role of leveraging pressure and demonstrating military credibility in achieving tangible results.
However, she tempered this acknowledgement with a stark assessment of the broader situation. Schmid explicitly stated that a genuine, sustainable peace process remains distant, cautioning that external intervention is indispensable for progress. “We are far from a sustainable peace process” she observed, emphasizing the need for discreet, backchannel negotiations extending beyond public pronouncements – a veiled critique of the often-performative nature of international diplomacy.
Schmid’s position gains particular significance as she currently leads the Middle East Consultation Group at the Munich Security Conference. This discreet body comprises influential figures – a mix of current and former politicians and experts from Israel, Palestine and across the Arab world. Preparations are underway for the group to release a comprehensive paper outlining potential future pathways for the region at the Munich Security Conference in February 2026.
The unexpected endorsement of Trump’s involvement, particularly at a time when European officials have frequently expressed reservations about his leadership, is likely to provoke considerable debate. It raises questions about the evolving strategies of seasoned diplomats and whether a reassessment of traditional approaches to the deeply entrenched conflict is underway in response to the perceived ineffectiveness of past peace initiatives. The forthcoming paper from Schmid’s consultation group will be keenly watched for its insights into how this new perspective might shape future efforts to navigate the complexities of the Middle East.