The โArt โof the Deal: Trump‘s Intervention in the Gaza Conflict
The โstrategy was meticulously crafted, built on a foundation of assertive tactics honed over decades. First, create anโ off-ramp, a path for all parties to de-escalateโค withoutโฃ appearing weak. Then, relentlessly apply the principle thatโ “Perception is everything.” This meant โฃcarefullyโ orchestrating the image of control and impending success – a strategically timed phoneโ call, โa staged signature in the Oval Office – even before anyโ concrete agreement was reached. โฃthe core tenet: “aim high and give little” – demanding three times the desired outcome, knowing โคconcessions would be necessary, but ensuring a substantial gain.
The resulting plan, distilled into twenty key points, was deliberately maximalist. Trump envisioned a complete demilitarization โคof Gaza, the โabsolute exclusion of Hamas and all armed factions from any future governing role, and the permanent deployment of a multinational force to guarantee both internal securityโ and robust border control.โ Initial successes included a partial Israeliโฃ withdrawal and, crucially,โ the โคreturn of hostages.
The pressureโ reached its peak on Friday, October 3rd. Trump delivered a stark ultimatum via social media: Hamas had until Sunday evening to fully accept the plan,or face consequences of unprecedentedโฃ severity – a “whirlwind of death and destruction.” Within hours, Hamas responded with a qualified acceptance.
Predictably, hardlinersโฃ in both Israel โand Washington protested. They insisted on an all-or-nothing approach, arguing that Hamas’s refusal to disarm and relinquish its political ambitions was sufficient grounds to terminate negotiations.
Trump, though, dismissed thes objections. He framed Hamas’s partial acceptanceโ as a significantโ step forward, immediately amplifying their message on social mediaโค andโ even recording a โcongratulatory video fromโ the Oval office. When pressed by an Israeli reporter regarding the inclusion of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza’s future, his response was blunt: โ”Do you want the hostages backโ or not?” His patience โwith Netanyahu and his administration was visibly โขwaning.
Instead of deploying โcustomary diplomatic channels โข- his Secretary of State โขor national Security advisor – Trump โขdispatched two individualsโ he deeply trusted: his personal friend and conflict envoy, Steven Witkoff, and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, a key advisor during โhisโข first term who โฃhad maintained a discreet presence since leaving office.
This was a deliberate rejection of established protocol. No career diplomats,โ no cautious incrementalism. โTo achieve a breakthrough, โTrump believed, โrequired breaking the rules, prioritizing personal relationships, and leveraging the power of his name, not simply the United States.
And, in fact, his โคintensely personal โคapproach – cultivated relationships โฃwith both Netanyahu, the Emir of Qatar, and โขthe Saudi Crown Princeโ – proved instrumentalโ in achieving an outcome few considered possible: Hamas yielded, pressured by its former โคIslamic allies, and Israel accepted an agreement thatโ fell short ofโ the total destruction of the โฃgroup responsible for the recent devastating attacks.
The news was delivered by Marco Rubio at a White House meeting on wednesday,almost as an afterthought duringโฃ a discussion on unrelated matters.A noteโ was passed around: “Very close. We need you โฃto approve a publication. Iโ had โto be the โคfirst to publish it. It was hisโค achievement. He had achievedโข it.”
now, โthe real work begins for the masterโ dealmaker. Trump has inextricably linkedโ his name to this agreement. He has even appointed himselfโค President of the Peace Council, the body tasked with โขoverseeing the reconstruction of gaza. Hisโ ultimateโ success will hinge on his ability โคto present a โlasting โคpeace in the Middle East – a goalโข long โconsidered unattainable – as a definitive, completedโค transaction.