Nothing but war

Author: Rajab Abu Sariya

Just one day after U.S. President Donald Trump said last Monday that the war on Gaza would end in two to three weeks, he returned on Tuesday with a statement completely at odds with what he had said 24 hours earlier, saying there is no comprehensive solution in the Middle East and that this has been the case for thousands of years. Naturally, Trump is not the only one showing contradictory political positions; members of his team do as well, specifically his Middle East envoy who is handling ceasefire negotiations in a war that most Israelis — even those outside government and from state institutions such as security and the military — say has lasted longer than it should. Steve Witkoff appears in an even worse state than his boss. Although he sounded more measured than Trump when he said he hoped to end the war before the end of the year, he later claimed that Hamas delayed the end of the war — even though the movement announced more than ten days ago its acceptance of the very proposal Witkoff himself had put forward months earlier, which Israel accepted immediately.
What is strange about the White House, represented by President Trump and his envoy Witkoff, is that they — _especially Trump_ — unleash their enthusiasm whenever Benjamin Netanyahu dangles a glimmer of hope, as if they do not really know Netanyahu, or as if they are only getting to know him now. In reality, Trump may be naive to the point of “foolishness and stupidity,” or he may be as cunning as Netanyahu — highly crafty and deceitful. If so, he has been carrying out a continuous deception of global, Israeli and American public opinion by repeatedly releasing balloons of hope, a tactic he has used since before entering the White House. It was clear that his aspiration for a Nobel Prize — and his resentment at it being awarded to his archenemy, former Democratic President Barack Obama — drove him to grandstand that he was a peacemaker, ending seven wars in different parts of the world.
What is surprising is that the proposal Hamas accepted under pressure from mediators Egypt and Qatar is the worst possible proposal, and it came after Netanyahu failed to follow through on the January deal negotiated in the presence of Witkoff on the eve of Trump’s inauguration. That deal was based on exchanging humanitarian aid for hostages and stipulated releasing half of the detainees, alive and dead, in return for a 60-day ceasefire — a formula vulnerable to Israeli backtracking. The release of living detainees, in particular, would occur on day one. To address the inherent injustice of this Israeli proposal, Egypt tried to amend it by reducing the number to be freed; Hamas then sought changes to the scale of Israeli military deployment, especially around the Philadelphi and Morag axes, and to the number of Palestinian prisoners to be released. Ultimately, on the 17th of this month Hamas agreed to Witkoff’s proposal at 98% of the original text. Despite Israel’s immediate acceptance when it was tabled, Netanyahu did not respond officially and did not send the negotiating delegation to sign the deal.
It is clear that the official Israeli system is “unsettled,” despite claims that it has devastated Gaza and forced Hamas to accept the deal under massive military pressure. Signs of this disarray appear in several directions: there are disputes between the army on one side and the government on the other about whether to prioritize negotiations or the “Gideon Vehicles 2” operation, and over the details of that operation — whether it should be conducted quickly or slowly — after agreeing that the best option is to continue negotiations while maintaining military operations. A rift also emerged within the military between the senior level represented by the chief of staff and the army brigades and the second level of colonels and senior officers. Signs of confusion are evident in the inability to make decisive choices in long, successive cabinet and government meetings that run for hours and end without resolutions, postponing decisions to another session.
All this is happening amid rising domestic protests. Failing to respond to Hamas’s acceptance of the near-final partial deal and instead preparing for a military operation intended to destroy every stone in Gaza and occupy the Strip completely would mean the killing of the hostages, the deaths of hundreds more soldiers, and further global anger as the annual United Nations General Assembly approaches. That gathering could become a forum for a collective international declaration recognizing Palestine as an independent state. More dangerously for Israel, several countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands have begun to impose sanctions and are not limiting themselves to recognizing a Palestinian state. The Irish president has even called for a U.N. decision under Chapter VII to force a halt to the war on Israel, saying this could be achieved through a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly to counter a possible U.S. veto.
It is also clear that the worsening famine and the repeated displacement of half the Gaza population — roughly one million people from Gaza and the central region — could push the world to do more than condemn Israel and recognize a Palestinian state. There are fragile situations in Lebanon, Syria and even with Iran, where confrontations could flare again at any moment on all fronts, including in the West Bank. Actions by the fascist finance minister Bezalel Smotrich to withhold tax clearance funds since last May have inflamed society there, turning the West Bank into a powder keg further exacerbated by daily settler violence visible to the world and the focus of European and global anger. If it explodes it will burn everything, while the Israeli army is exhausted from the Gaza war and Netanyahu forces it to carry out one operation after another without declaring that military and political objectives have been achieved or declaring victory so far.
It seems Netanyahu and his ruling coalition have become addicted to war, or they have come to understand well that the day it ends — whatever the final outcome — even if Netanyahu then proclaims a resounding victory and claims he achieved all he wanted politically and militarily (which is still unconfirmed, at least regarding two goals: freeing living hostages and displacing Gaza’s population) will be costly. The first goal will be sacrificed if Hamas is crushed militarily because without negotiations the alternative is the Samson option — killing the hostages with their captors. The second goal — displacement — is being firmly resisted by Egypt, which not only refuses to participate but has the right to do so. After presenting a counterplan to the Trumpian displacement plan and proposing a post-war alternative, Egypt has removed the false justifications of the Israeli government’s hardliners for ousting Hamas from power and prevented the pretext of refusing the Palestinian Authority as a governing alternative while ensuring Gaza will not pose a future security threat. After forcing Hamas to accept Witkoff’s proposal, Egypt left Israel with no option but to confront its own extremists directly, because they have become an existential threat to Israel’s membership in the international community. With opposition stability in recent weeks in opinion polls — including the leftist Democratic party — the opposition rushed to reorganize, seeing next September as a watershed moment to begin “harvesting” from a two-year, bone-breaking struggle in which both sides lost: Hamas saw its military force smashed and its rule in Gaza eroded, and the Israeli right now fears not only the day after a ceasefire but is also afraid of the next elections, whether held early or on schedule in 2026.
Therefore, the next three weeks represent a dead period. The outcomes of the New York declaration at the General Assembly meeting will be decisive in determining the future of the Middle East. Since the Palestinian-Israeli conflict remains its key, the clash of wills between those who seek a Greater Israel and those who support a two-state solution will end in favor of one side, and the day after could see Gaza without Hamas rule and Israel without a Netanyahu_ Ben-Gvir_ Smotrich government.