LIVE: FC Buffalo vs Erie Commodores FC ( Mens )

President Donald Trump stood with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and announced a new ceasefire proposal and peace plan, but critics couldn't help but notice it's missing some critical pieces — namely, that a key party is missing.

Steve Herman, executive director at the Jordan Center for Journalism Advocacy and Innovation, quoted Trump's comment, "Everyone else has accepted it."

"Except Hamas, according to President Trump, explaining his plan calls for a 'Board of Peace' to be headed by himself," said Herman.

It prompted national security lawyer Bradly P. Moss to remark, "So, you know, a peace plan missing a vital party."

"The new official Trump plan for Gaza. Quite a few things to parse out, including accountability mechanisms, who actually makes up the stabilisation force, and what mandate they would have," said Dr. H.A. Hellyer, a geopolitics and security expert on the Middle East and Europe at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies.

Even senior Washington Examiner writer David Harsanyi had questions: "This plan has been tried more than once. Palestinians have never been able to meet #1."

Bloomberg's Washington Correspondent Josh Wingrove couldn't help but notice that the plan, "previously described as a '21-point plan,'" now "includes 20 points and an image of proposed withdrawals."

"The points include a call for Gaza's governance to be supervised by a 'Board of Peace' - chaired by Trump himself," added Wingrove.

White House columnist Niall Stanage, at "The Hill," also questioned, "It runs to 20 points but how will point 1 — upon which all else may hinge — be defined or verified and by whom?"

"If Trump is to be the head of the newly established transitional administration in Gaza, it means Gaza is becoming a mandate of the USA. Blair is the Mandate Governor," observed Tuğçe Varol, an academic working on Russian and Turkish foreign policy.

After a series of diplomatic blunders, President Donald Trump and America's reputation loss could "raise the risk of global conflict" and come at a major cost, including "mischief or worse" from enemies.

In an opinion piece published Monday, Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth describes how a good reputation can be difficult to obtain or maintain, and Trump "has squandered whatever credibility America had left in foreign and security policy."

Following his rambling speech last week in front of the United Nations and his struggle to see the difference between "personal chemistry" with President Vladimir Putin and diplomatic action, Trump has effectively put both adversaries and allies on edge, wrote Kluth.

"Inklings of danger are everywhere," Kluth writes. "America’s partners are becoming more anxious and making alternative arrangements for their security: Saudi Arabia just signed a defensive pact with Pakistan after watching an Israeli strike against its Gulf neighbor Qatar, which is allied to, but got no help from, the United States. America’s adversaries keep testing the resolve of Trump and the West, as Putin is doing in eastern Europe. Or, like Xi Jinping in Beijing and Kim in Pyongyang, they’re recalculating bellicose scenarios in secret. Other countries, like India, are wary of committing to America and keeping all options open, even clutching hands with Moscow and Beijing."

And although Trump is not the first president to struggle with navigating U.S. reputation among foreign nations, it puts America at an unfortunate future disadvantage.

"Against this backdrop, anybody watching US policy for the past decade, from friendly Europe to adversarial China, already had reason to doubt US credibility. What Trump has done in his second term is to remove the doubts and confirm the loss. Allies now know they can’t trust America, while adversaries are ganging up and recalculating their plans for mischief or worse.

It's unclear what will happen in the future; a damaged reputation jeopardizes diplomacy.

"These responses to America’s loss of credibility will raise the risk of global conflict," Kluth writes. "The danger will go up even more if the US, under this or a future president, panics and decides to overcompensate in reestablishing its reputation, with a demonstratively hawkish turn that could tip into war. If America and the whole world are becoming less safe, it’s because Donald Trump’s foreign policy is, literally, in-credible."