Critics of President Donald Trump (myself included) should not begrudge the credit he has taken for the ceasefire in Gaza and the return of the Israeli hostages. It’s a major development and a triumphant one at that.
The president exaggerated when he declared “This is a historic dawn of a new Middle East.” But he deserves to revel in a diplomatic victory. Moreover, Katy Tur of MSNBC was certainly off base when she suggested in the wake of the peace summit in Egypt that the event was a mere “photo op.”
On the other hand, the Middle East (and Gaza in particular) remains very much a hot spot. Israel and Hamas have agreed to a ceasefire. Neither party has agreed to peace. The ceasefire leaves in place 7000 armed Hamas terrorists occupying most of Gaza. And as of this writing President Trump insists that those Hamas militants must be disarmed and he implied that if Hamas does not disarm, then “we” (presumably the United States) will disarm them. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also exhibited impatience with Hamas having yet to return the remains of those hostages who did not survive, an explicit demand made in the ceasefire.
My recent contention on these pages that creation of a Palestinian state will not end the Arab-Israeli conflict also still stands. Look no further than the gathering in Egypt. Every party to the ceasefire was represented except Israel. Lest you guess that Netanyahu was not present due to the active warrant for him issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the fact is that Egypt is not a signatory to the ICC and there would have been no jurisdiction to arrest Netanyahu.
Trump had to stop in Israel to make a personal call on Netanyahu prior to the gathering in Egypt. And why was Netanyahu not in Egypt for the event? Because he wasn’t welcome. This gathering of Arab states continues to harbor animosity toward Israel (even those Arab states who maintain relations with Israel as part of the Abraham Accords).
It would be easy to insist this animosity is directed at Netanyahu personally and not at Israel itself. But such an assertion would be most disingenuous. The diplomatic players in the Middle East aren’t resigned to the existence of a Jewish state in the region. Though my own personal criticism of Netanyahu is not aimed at Israel itself, this is not the case with those nations who convened in Egypt.
As to the ceasefire, Hamas and Israel remain in a state of war with eachother. Of course, Hamas is backed by the Shi’ite regime in Iran and poses as much a threat to the Arab states as it does to Israel. This common ground between the Arab states and Israel is solid enough to establish a ceasefire. But there is still a long way to go before a lasting peace in the Middle East is realized between Israel and the Arab states.
As stated, Trump’s enthusiasm is legitimate. But his optimism is a bit excessive. He again reiterated his hope that Iran will become so isolated in the region that it may have no choice but to engage in diplomacy. The hard truth is that Iran will not come to any peace table, especially one including Israel, until there is a regime change.
All of that being said, the ceasefire is a big deal notwithstanding the remaining concerns. My fellow critics of President Trump may resent any credit extended to him. But if half of the electorate cannot acknowledge a diplomatic victory on the part of the president, how can we expect the nations of the Middle East to attain peace?
John O’Neill is an Allen Park free-lance writer and a graduate of Wayne State University.
