Virtual Dialogue

Author: Talal Oukal

No official outside the United States receives the pampering afforded to Benjamin Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court. He has been a guest of Donald Trump four times since the latter took office nearly nine months ago. And each time Netanyahu did not leave empty-handed, despite rumors before some visits suggesting tension between them.
During his campaign, Trump promised he would be able to secure the release of the Israeli hostages as soon as he entered the White House, and he made the same pledge regarding the war in Ukraine, claiming that if he had been president earlier those wars would not have occurred.
Trump pays little heed to those who accuse him of quickly reversing his positions or saying one thing and its opposite; his close interpreters might even present that as a deliberate strategy to achieve his goals, to win the Nobel Prize and to make America great — or greatest — again.
Some may say that the charismatic Netanyahu has always managed to manipulate previous U.S. administrations and drag past presidents where he wanted. Does that apply to Trump?
If previous presidents were generally subject to, or at least influenced by, the strong pressures exerted by the Zionist lobby in America to win a second term, the situation is different with Trump.
Trump does not need, nor bow to, pressure from any side, because today he is a crowned emperor who controls the executive, legislative and judicial branches — some even describe him as a democratic dictator.
If Trump pays no heed to internal or external pressures, he nevertheless shapes his policies and positions out of a deep conviction, especially regarding his view of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Those who examine the personalities of Trump and Netanyahu may conclude that they are twins: narcissistic to the extreme, each believing he is chosen by God, both adept at walking a tightrope, and both considering lying a virtue — perhaps even a divine gift.
During Netanyahu’s recent visit to the United Nations he left the General Assembly hall angry and sullen because most delegations boycotted his speech, but he quickly regained his composure after preparatory meetings with Trump’s aides before their encounter.
Before meeting Netanyahu, Trump had held a meeting with officials from eight significant Arab and Muslim countries, during which they agreed on his plan to end the exterminatory war in Gaza and secure the release of the hostages. Trump praised the meeting and called it a great achievement for peace in the Middle East. When the Arab and Muslim delegations welcomed the meeting’s outcomes, the natural conclusion was that what had been agreed with Trump must be positive, fair and promising. That conclusion was undermined when Trump met Netanyahu, who emerged with a plan that did not match what had been agreed with the delegation of eight Arab and Muslim states.
Pakistan directly expressed what could be considered a sense of betrayal, followed by comments from the Egyptian foreign minister and Qatar’s prime minister and foreign minister, who hinted that the plan in its final version requires further discussion, clarification and amendments — clearly indicating it contained clauses contrary to the prior agreement.
I assume that Trump did not pressure Netanyahu as some expected. Rather, he engaged him in a cordial dialogue that convinced Netanyahu to apologize publicly and explicitly to Qatar for the aggression against it, with a promise that it would not happen again.
In return, Trump opened the plan to Netanyahu so he could include whatever amendments he saw fit, allowing Netanyahu to claim before his society and his fascist coalition that the plan was essentially Israeli in origin.
I also assume Trump presented Netanyahu with the following arguments to secure his acceptance of an apology to Qatar and a positive engagement with a plan that contained clauses Netanyahu opposed:
“Dear Netanyahu, I understand your goals and I will strongly support achieving them. You want a decisive victory, dominance over the Middle East, and to make Israel great and preeminent, and I want that for you — so we will continue our support and work to lift your state’s isolation.
But, dear Netanyahu, I am also working to make America great and to maintain its dominance in the global order, and the Middle East is crucial for that objective.
I also desperately want to win the Nobel Peace Prize; what I have achieved so far is not enough, and so I need your help to make the plan a success in this troubled and dangerous region.
I failed to secure peace in Ukraine because of a stubborn leader named Vladimir Putin, so we must achieve peace in the Middle East, which would qualify me for the prize for which I have been nominated.
Dear Netanyahu, Israel matters more to America than Europe — the old continent that cannot defend itself and relies on us to protect its security at the expense of our taxpayers’ money, which is unacceptable.
The Middle East is a region of vast money and wealth, and our interests in the struggle with China and its allies require controlling it and filling our coffers with its funds.
You too will benefit from achieving peace in the Middle East on our shared terms, and we support you because you play a very important role in achieving that peace with the force and boldness you possess and the relations and influence we have in the region.
We have given you time and more support; we have not stopped providing weapons, money, political and diplomatic backing, yet you have not succeeded so far in subduing everyone.
You must calculate your steps precisely and inform us before any action. The bombing of Qatar led to shifts in some countries’ alliances that were not in our or your favor. So please control your nerves and deal positively with the plan. If we succeed in implementing the first phase — the release of the hostages — you can handle the remaining clauses and entitlements in whatever way you see fit for your interests and vision.”
And finally — isn’t that what Netanyahu declared after Hamas accepted the plan?