Trump’s Peace Deal May Prove Short-Lived
The hostages have been released, but the war appears back on.
NYT (“White House Works to Preserve Gaza Deal Amid Concerns About Netanyahu“):
The White House worked to hold together the Gaza peace deal on Monday as American officials said they were increasingly concerned that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, could dismantle the U.S.-brokered agreement.
Vice President JD Vance was headed to Israel, where he was to join Steve Witkoff, Mr. Trump’s Middle East peace envoy, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, who were instrumental in brokering the deal.
At the same time, President Trump warned that he would allow Israeli forces to “eradicate” Hamas if violence in the enclave continued.
“We made a deal with Hamas that, you know, they’re going to be very good. They’re going to behave. They’re going to be nice,” Mr. Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday. “And if they’re not, we’re going to go and we’re going to eradicate them if we have to. They’ll be eradicated. And they know that.”
Mr. Vance’s expected arrival was meant to add an extra symbolic layer to illustrate the administration’s commitment to keeping the deal intact. The administration brokered a cease-fire this month in a two-year war between Israel and Hamas. But a new round of violence on Sunday has highlighted the fragility of the 10-day-old cease-fire. According to the Israeli military, two Israeli soldiers were killed and another was wounded when Palestinian militants launched an anti-tank missile at an army vehicle.
[…]
Israel and Hamas have accused each other of violating the truce after repeated flare-ups of violence in recent days. But both sides have said they were still committed to maintaining the truce.
For now, the president believes that Hamas leaders are willing to continue negotiations in good faith and that the attack on Israeli solders was carried out by a fringe element of the group, according to a White House official who spoke privately to convey the president’s thinking.
Indeed, Mr. Trump has bucked Israeli declarations that Hamas had violated the agreement. On Monday, he characterized the current fighting in Gaza as a “rebellion” in Hamas that was not representative of the organization’s leadership. He said that some Hamas fighters “got very rambunctious,” but that if the violence continued, the United States would permit Israel to violently eliminate the organization.
When one side in the conflict is a terrorist group, it doesn’t take much for a fringe element to create incidents that spark retaliation. It has happened time and time again in the Middle East wars, whether the negotiating partner is the PLO, Hezbollah, or Hamas.
Still, while the Israeli government has every right to demand that Hamas leadership reign in violence, the response here has been grossly disproportionate.
An Economist leader (“Why Gaza’s ‘eternal’ ceasefire is holding—for now“) is more optimistic than events on the ground seem to warrant.
It was not the first time Israel and Hamas have broken their commitments. The latter has dragged its feet on returning the bodies of hostages who died in captivity. Just 12 of 28 have been handed over to Israel, which in turn has refused to reopen the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) have repeatedly shot at Gazans who strayed across the ill-defined boundary into areas under Israeli control.
None of this means the ceasefire is about to collapse. Even though there will no doubt be further violations, for now a mix of self-interest and American pressure should ensure that Israel and Hamas remain party to the deal. But the events of the past week underscore both how urgent it is to negotiate the next phase of the ceasefire—and how difficult it will be.
The Israeli unit that was attacked on October 19th had been tasked with demolishing tunnels in an Israeli-controlled part of Rafah. The IDF said it came under fire from Hamas militants, who launched anti-tank missiles that killed two soldiers. Israel then carried out dozens of air strikes across the territory, killing at least 26 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s health ministry. The bombardment went on for several hours, until Israel announced that the ceasefire was back in force.
Such incidents seem almost inevitable. Although the ceasefire demands that Hamas disarm, negotiators have yet to agree on a practical mechanism by which it might be forced to do so. The IDF continues to control an estimated 53% of Gazan territory. And after two years of war that killed many of Hamas’s leaders, its surviving military units operate semi-autonomously: their commanders elsewhere in Gaza do not always know what they are doing, let alone their political leaders living in villas abroad. All of that makes for a combustible mix.
Yet both sides also have an interest in avoiding a total breakdown. Some of Hamas’s commanders no doubt hope to keep up sporadic guerrilla attacks on Israeli troops. They will be keen to test how much they can get away with. But they do not want the ceasefire to fall apart entirely. With no living hostages left in its grasp, Hamas would have little leverage to stop the next round of fighting.
In Israel, meanwhile, far-right ministers have wanted to tear up the deal since it was signed. Mr Netanyahu has pointedly refused to say that the war is over for good. Mr Trump has a lot at stake, though: he has made it clear to Israel that it cannot abandon the ceasefire, at least for now. When the fighting began in Rafah, Israel announced that it would suspend the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza. It reversed that decision within hours under strong American pressure.
While Netanyahu was under great pressure to get the living hostages back—which has now been achieved—he’s under substantial pressure from within his coalition to finish what was started: the complete destruction of Hamas, if not the reclaiming of Gaza for Israel. It seems that pressure from the Trump administration is the chief obstacle to that.
Even so, the long-term future of the ceasefire is uncertain. Mr Trump’s plan calls for a multinational peacekeeping force that will take charge of security in Gaza. A few countries have expressed interest in joining, but none has made a firm commitment yet. Several diplomats in the region say the violence in Rafah will reinforce fears among Arab leaders, who worry about a political backlash at home should their troops wind up in a shootout with Palestinians.
Even if pledges do materialise, it will probably take several months to field the force. There is little chance of disarming Hamas until then, nor will the IDF carry out further withdrawals. Hamas will use that time to consolidate power in Gaza by killing and torturing rivals (it has already executed dozens). There will be no return to all-out war—but it will hardly be eternal peace.
The negotiated settlement is a good one on paper. An international peacekeeping force is likely the only hope for a sustained peace. But the path from the first stage of the plan to that stage was never clear.
********************@
And which side would that be?
Let’s not pretend Israel is innocent in all this. Settlements, the wall, indiscriminate bombing of civilians (aka “Collective Punishment”), bulldozers, etc.
There are no “good” sides in this conflict, except for the innocent people – Israelis and Arabs both – caught up in the middle of the awful leadership’s politics and warmaking.
@Tony W: Israel is a state actor with a government that can be held accountable by both its own people and the international community. That’s simply not true of a nonstate actor like Hamas.
I note that, at least in the excerpts above, the Economist sticks to realities on the ground and avoids NYT’s practice of repeating Trump’s and the administration’s words as though they have meaning.
You’re right to describe this as “grossly disproportionate”. In fact, it sounds like the WWII incidents of the Germans destroying a nearby village after a partisan attack, for which, IIRC, German commanders were convicted of war crimes.
I think this is what has to happen. Hamas, like Al-Queda, ISIS, etc. will never quit. They will never actually ever go away either. An Islamic state actor like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan or some combination of all has to step in and occupy Gaza. I don’t think that will happen. Therefore, there is no solution that I can see.
Israel cannot come out of this untransformed either. They can’t continue to occupy the West Bank and maybe Gaza without absorbing the Palestinians into their society. And they won’t do that.
And can I add: exactly what is the United States interest any more in the Middle East?
Seems the problem that would-be peacemakers face in the Middle East is the same one Congressional Dems at home have – to wit, the difficulty of reaching a lasting agreement when the other party refuses to negotiate in good faith.
Maybe Hamas attacked the IDF and they’re lying. Or maybe the IDF tank ran over something unexploded and Israel is lying. Why would anyone believe either side?
Everything is fantasy without even an architecture for fantasy. Israel and America attacked Gaza for two years and they don’t even have the abilities to produce the weak stuff that Rumsfeld and Cheney produced for post-war Iraq. No one involved seems to know the first thing about Palestinians, and they’re so racist they don’t even find this troubling.
– Unfortunate pun, James. I think you mean “rein in violence.”
I, for one, am shocked to learn that Trump’s declaration that Peace had come to the Middle East was insufficient magic words to forestall such outcomes.
@Steven L. Taylor:
The incantations don’t work without a Nobel Prize. it’s Norway’s fault. I suggest a 10,000,000,000% tariff on salted fish and on Grieg’s music.
@Scott:
Yep.
The deal was dead the minute Hamas decided to begin executing rivals. That signaled clearly that Hamas was not stepping away from power, which was the predicate for anything that followed. Point 13 from the 20 point plan:
This was always a fantasy. If Hamas is going to keep being Hamas, then the extermination of Hamas is justified. We can’t blame the Israelis for this. It’s not Israel’s fault that Hamas behaved exactly as Israelis knew it would. Is Israel’s response ‘disproportionate’? Not if you recognize what Israel recognizes, which is that this peace plan is nonsense, and the job of exterminating Hamas remains unfinished.
Israel got their hostages back. Hamas gave up the burden of holding those hostages. This was in effect a short-term ceasefire to allow for an exchange of prisoners. I’m not at all surprised, but I claim no great insight here: betting on a good outcome where Palestinians are involved, is a sucker bet.
Hamas apologists should take a good, long look at why Egypt and Jordan refuse to take in Gazan refugees. Like the Israelis, they know Hamas. There’s a reason why Netanyahu is smirking in every two-shot with Trump – he knew the outcome. The pity here is that the evacuation of Gaza City has been reversed so that more civilians are in the line of fire.
Hoocoodanode.
I’m shocked, shocked.
@Modulo Myself:
You keep trying to cast this in moral terms, looking for good guys and bad guys. Simplify: they’re all assholes, and they’re all liars. There is no heroic narrative to be found here.
Casting Israel and the US as the villains is simplistic and ignores not only history, but present day realities. You’re trying to bang a square peg into a round hole. This is not a morality play, this is one piece of land with two sides claiming exclusive ownership. Just like Mongols and everyone they ran into. Just like Americans and everyone we ran into. Just like the whole fucked-up world, where there is scarcely an inhabited square meter of planet Earth that was not taken by force. In every one of those thousands and thousands of conquests innocent people are the primary victims, and the winners are whichever side has the power.
Mourn the victims, that is fair and right. Wish that there was less carnage, that is fair and right. Pretending this is some fairy tale with evil orcs on one side and sweet hobbits on the other is childish.
There is still probably time, though not that not much, to get a “stabilisation” (aka “occupation”) force into Gaza.
Politically, the intersting side of all this is how Netanyahu, with both his sucesses and failures, and above all his tendency to disdain towards all outside his coalition and pandering to those within it, has ended up screwing himself.
The Israeli leverage with many Arabs depended on their seeing Iran as the greater threat.
The evisceration of Hezbollah, the (de facto Turkish) overthrow of Assad in Syria, and the hammering of Iran itself has changed that calculus.
Israel could have had similar, and perhaps better, from its pov, “termination state” terms back in March, at least.
The continuation of the Israeli operation into inducing famine conditions in parts of Gaza, and the continued chat of the Israeli coalition minister about expulsion and annexations, and a heavy-handed meddling in Syria, led to to a collapse in the Israeli diplomatic position in many previously rather friendly countries, and the proliferation of “recognition of Palestine” as the only way to signal to Jerusalem exactly how pissed off they were.
Which was unfortunate, as many had been keeping this in reserve as means to induce and reward a marginalisation of Hamas.
Then came Netanyahu’s real mistake: he tried to take out the Hamas leaders in Qatar, and failed.
And even failing, provoked the Saudis and Gulfies to utter rage.
Also, as Trump had been continuing to sponsor talks in Qatar, and the Qataris had been buttering him up big time, it seems Trump took it as a personal affront, and decided to force Netanyahu to bend.
Not only that, but the Kushner/Witkoff/Saudi/Gulf group persuded Trump to endorse their strategy: no expulsion, no annexations, possible role for PA, etc.
Then the Arabs and Turkey curb Hamas external operations, an occupation force is placed in Gaza, the Gulf funds relief and reconstruction.
In exchange, the US brings Israel to heel over Gaza, West Bank, and Syria.
Netanyahu’s fundamental miscalculation has been that the Likud/Republican alignement would inevitably ensure he retained freedom of action due to certainty of US support.
But Trump is not the servant of the Republicans: he is their master.
They won’t cross him and MAGA, and therefore annoying Trump was a massive error of judgement.
Ironically, and how it pains me to say this, the combination of Trump’s pique, and Netanyahu’s (and Turkeys) anti-Iran sucesses, may have actually turned out to offer a glimmer of oportunity for a “non-horrific” outcome.
But that “stabilization force” is needed asap.
@Michael Reynolds:
It really depends a lot on the stabilization/occupation force instituted, its terms of refrence, rules *ahem* of engagement, legal basis and powers, etc.
There will, inevitably, continue to be Hamas symaptizers in Gaza; as in the West Bank, the Palestinian diaspora, and among some elements of the wider Arab and Muslim public opinion.
The question is, can the putative occupation military/security force oblige the Hamas “militants” to keep their heads down, on pain of losing them?
Shorn of the inflow of funds from the Hamas networks in the Gulf and Turkey, and the Iranian/Hezbollah backstops, it may, rather messily, kinda sorta work; for an arbitrary value of “work”.
But it is also going to need Israel to back off in the West Bank, and accept that only a Fatah/Palestinian Authority control of Gaza is likely to work longer term.
Its going to be difficult to get the Netanyahu coalition to accept that.
And also needs the Arabs to put Fatah’s nuts in the vice to curb its corrupt cronyism to reasonable proportions.
@Modulo Myself:
In this respect I think you are mistaken, at least as regards Israelis.
It bears repeating that the majority of modern Israelis are whollly or partly of Middle Eastern origins ie Mizrahi.
Many of whom grew up in housholds that often spoke Arabic at home more than Hebrew, and were culturally closer to Arabs than to Europeans.
Part of the reason for the sucess of many Israeli intelligence and security operations has been due to the ability of quite large numbers of Israelis to “pass” as Arabs.
(Hamas has been an exception to infiltration operations, due to its tight knit basis, and intense focus on internal security and background verification, unlike the PLO of old)
@Michael Reynolds:..this is one piece of land with two sides claiming exclusive ownership.
One weekend afternoon in the mid ‘80s I watched a television program hosted by Linda Ellerbee. She had two groups of teenagers in the studio. There were three or four in each group maybe 14-17 years old. One group were Israeli the other Palestinian. If I remember accurately a boy child from one group began: “It says in our Holy Book that thousands of years ago God gave us this land. It is ours and we must fight to defend and protect it.”
Then a girl child from the other group spoke: “Our Holy Book tells us that God gave us this land thousands of years ago. We have the right to fight to keep it.”
There was more but this was 40 years ago and these opening declarations are all that I remember. I often wonder where those children are today.
Since then I have held fast to my solution for this conflict.
Burn all the Holy Books!