If it is actually implemented as presented, US President Donald Trump’s “Vision for Peace, Prosperity, and a Brighter Future for Israel and the Palestinian People” has many positives for Israel.On a personal note the inclusion of my community, Tekoa, within the State of Israel is a crowning point of 40 years of struggle since I and my wife, Beverly, became Family No. 6 in the community. If the deal goes through I will no longer be living in a settlement which some Israelis viewed pejoratively but in a town enjoying the same legal standing and obligations as other Israeli towns. This sense of satisfaction and even vindication is marred by survivors’ guilt about 15 communities that will not be incorporated in Israel’s borders under the plan. They include Otniel, which has lost many members to Arab terror and where three of my sons studied, and Elon Moreh, whose original nucleus was instrumental in launching the settlement movement.I fear for their future in the most unlikely case the other side actually accepts the plan and meets its conditions. The Trump plan, as opposed to preceding plans, gives Israel points on the scoreboard in terms of tangible territorial gains from its victory in a defensive war and drives home the point to the Palestinians that violence and refusal to negotiate have penalties.This is a very useful corrective to the notion that all the territories were in escrow and would be turned over once the Palestinians were willing to recognize a Jewish state alongside them and renounced the right of return. The desired effect will not be immediate and the deal may even trigger a new round of violence (although we have known many such threats and most of them did not materialize), but it is the only way forward.The willingness of both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of the Likud, and Blue and White leader Benny Gantz to endorse the proposal means that Israeli politics may finally become unblocked. Now that a consensus has been reached on the territorial issue, Israeli politics can be normalized.Governments and opposition will command support on the basis of their record in office and the credibility of their platforms – not because of their position on Israel’s borders. Israeli politics may get to resemble US and British politics in their pre-polarization era. Then a victory for one coalition will not be a nightmare to many and the losing side can serve as the loyal and occasionally bipartisan opposition and consider itself a credible alternative to the current government.Now for the caveats: Unfortunately, the misunderstanding about immediate annexation and Jared Kushner’s remark that the map is not a final one have dissipated some of the early euphoria.For an Israeli government to concede a Palestinian state, it must be able to pocket the concessions. If there is a map that shows the boundary of the Jewish state under the accord, Israel should be free to begin massive construction forthwith and particularly in united Jerusalem where a de facto building freeze has been going on.If the negotiating period is slated to last four years, it is important to know who will be the umpire during its duration and at its close. It is one thing if Trump continues in office but quite another if he is succeeded by the likes of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren or even Pete Buttigieg, as then the blanks will be filled in quite differently.As this was a decision by the executive without referring it for Senate approval, a Democratic successor may not consider himself bound as he rushes to erase the remnants of a Trump legacy.Barack Obama’s ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, put it bluntly: “I think Israeli citizens should take into account that in less than a year there could be a new, Democratic administration – if not in a year then in five years. Trump won’t be president forever. It is important to know that any Democratic candidate will oppose this plan and that no Democratic president will be bound by it.” Shapiro has the example of his former boss to rely on. The 2004 letter by President George H.W. Bush that implied territorial changes and was a token reward for the surrender of Gaza and the razing of its Jewish communities was cavalierly discarded by the Obama administration.In addition to warding off international pressure to whittle down the terms of the plan to Israel’s disfavor, the history of the Zionist project teaches us that no agreement is self-enforcing and it must be vigorously defended. There will be attempts to encroach on territory earmarked for the Jewish state. Illegal Arab construction perhaps funded by the Qataris or by the EU will attempt to contest Israel’s new borders. Israel’s record in protecting itself against such illegal construction has been spotty and tentative.The rollout of the deal was the easy part. Now the future Israeli government will be tested by its ability to maximize Israel’s benefits under the plan irrespective of whether it is implemented or becomes a dead letter.