So That It Won’t Be Said, ‘We Didn’t Know’
He adds that the America known to the ancestors of Arabs no longer exists in reality. He describes Trump’s advisors as mere cheerleaders who dare not criticize or warn him about what he is heading towards.
"Today, we face a reality where America votes alongside North Korea at the United Nations. We have a president who views France as a tenant renting a shop in his personal real estate empire, now complaining that the rent paid is not worth what France is getting in return. We have a president who openly blackmails a leader of a country that has been attacked and had its lands occupied—live on air."
"This is the America the world will have to deal with from now on, or at least for the next four years."
On March 4, and the fourth day of Ramadan 2025, the Arab Summit concluded, issuing its final statement with 23 clauses, reaffirming what has been confirmed for over seventy years. However, what makes this time different is that the existential threat to the Palestinian people is no longer just an underlying concern inferred between the lines of Israeli policies. It has become explicit plans, visions, and ideas adopted by the biggest supporter of Israel—the United States—led by a president from outside the traditional U.S. institutional framework.
The summit was convened precisely to address this issue, pushing Arab nations to collectively reject the proposal to avoid placing the burden solely on Egypt and Jordan, the two states directly concerned. Trump had suggested these two countries as destinations for Palestinian displacement. The rejection by Israel and the U.S. was swift, dismissing the summit’s resolutions as outdated and irrelevant. Discussions on peace and the two-state solution had already hit a dead end.
Arab leaders had barely returned to their countries when American and Israeli media leaked news of direct negotiations between the U.S. and Hamas. This sparked a media frenzy in the Arab world, though the news should not have come as a surprise. U.S. and Israeli statements—as well as Hamas itself—had hinted at it.
From a pragmatic perspective, it makes sense: Hamas holds hostages, and their fate is a life-or-death matter. Trump has already demonstrated a pattern of unprecedented and bizarre actions within just fifty days of his presidency. He seeks recognition, headlines, and a spotlight—whether through constructive or destructive means is irrelevant as long as it feeds his narcissism. Like a newly crowned king, he races against time to secure his throne, fearing someone might snatch it away.
Just hours after the news broke, Trump took to his Truth Social platform, addressing Hamas directly with a post beginning with the Hebrew word "Shalom, Hamas"—a greeting that also means hello and goodbye. His message carried a direct ultimatum: release the hostages or face severe consequences. He also demanded that Hamas leaders leave Gaza. His post included a video of eight Israeli hostages recently released in a prisoner exchange, packed with overt and covert messages alike.
Whether or not this aligned with the Israeli government's stance was beside the point. The core message was clear: Trump wanted to brand himself as the only person on the planet capable of resolving the Israeli hostage crisis in Gaza.
Soon after, Hamas’ military spokesperson, Abu Obeida, appeared, reaffirming the movement's unwavering stance: negotiations must follow the framework of previously signed Israeli agreements, starting with the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, including the Philadelphia Corridor. Hamas, holding ground in Gaza, would not accept anything less.
Was this public declaration intended to alleviate pressure on Hamas' external leadership, currently negotiating with the U.S.? Or was it a clear boundary set for those engaged in negotiations, defining limits they must not cross?
Meanwhile, Israel shifted the spotlight to the appointment of Eyal Zamir as the new Chief of Staff of the Israeli military, replacing Herzi Halevi, who was burdened with the failure of October 7. The Israeli government was eager to pin the blame entirely on the military and intelligence establishment, deflecting accountability from political leadership. Zamir’s appointment sent a clear message, particularly to Hamas: military force remained Israel’s primary and final option. Netanyahu had declared that 2025 was a year of war, and Zamir’s presence reaffirmed that commitment.
Shortly thereafter, Hamas' military wing, Al-Qassam Brigades, released a video featuring an Israeli soldier held in Gaza. The soldier explicitly stated that he had been captive for 510 days—a direct signal to international observers that he was alive. But beyond this, the video was brimming with layered messages, both apparent and hidden. Uniquely, the video focused on Trump, portraying him as the only savior capable of ending the soldier’s ordeal.
The underlying irony? A captive held underground for 518 days, likely oblivious to night and day, was suddenly attuned to Trump's supposed grand vision. But this was precisely the tune Hamas knew would resonate with Trump. Like other global actors, Hamas had learned to play his ego masterfully—and it was eager to engage.
Just minutes after the video surfaced, Abdul Malik al-Houthi appeared—a figure so absent from the public eye that many had nearly forgotten his appearance. He gave mediators a strict four-day deadline to secure an agreement that would lift the blockade on Gaza, reopen border crossings, and allow humanitarian aid. If unmet, he threatened to resume intercepting Israeli-linked ships.
The rationale behind the four-day ultimatum was unclear. Was it based on insider knowledge of ongoing negotiations? A response to an anticipated Israeli attack? Or simply an arbitrary deadline meant to exert pressure on negotiators? Regardless, the message was clear: time was running out. The Palestinian people, who had glimpsed a flicker of relief in the past fifty days, were unwilling to return to the horrors of the last sixteen months.
These rapidly unfolding events involve a complex web of players, far beyond those directly engaged in the war itself. The consequences of this conflict will shape geopolitical realities for decades.
For those with vested interests, October 7 was not a catastrophe—it was the ultimate opportunity. It allowed for the reconfiguration of geopolitical spheres in ways previously deemed impossible. For those orchestrating these shifts, having a U.S. president who aligns so perfectly with Zionist ambitions was nothing short of a dream come true. Trump, in their eyes, is more than willing to trade power, influence, and media limelight for the fulfillment of their grand vision.
Recent media leaks suggest rising tensions between Trump’s administration and Netanyahu over the U.S.-Hamas talks. Some claim Netanyahu opposes these negotiations, but such an analysis ignores the reality: If these talks were about concluding the second phase of the hostage deal—securing the release of Israeli soldiers, removing top Hamas leaders from Gaza, and disarming remaining militants—then dismissing them as a disagreement would be naïve.
Diplomatic channels, guided by figures like Fotkov and Dreamer, have carefully outlined these discussions. Even Bezalel Smotrich, during his U.S. visit, was aware of them. Trump himself explicitly stated that these negotiations were designed to help Israel recover its hostages.
The more puzzling discourse revolves around reported internal disputes within Hamas—between Mousa Abu Marzouk’s faction, which negotiates directly with the U.S., and Khalil al-Hayya’s faction, which engages through official mediation channels.
Ultimately, Hamas’ leverage is limited to a few dozen hostages still alive. While their fate is crucial to both the Trump administration and Netanyahu’s government, they remain expendable if negotiations fail to yield strategic gains.
Conclusion
Any progress in Trump's negotiations with Hamas will come at a cost. And the one who will pay the price is Benjamin Netanyahu. The stakes will be high—but if framed correctly, he could claim victory.
Would Hamas accept this "outside-the-box" solution? If so, the world might soon witness an unprecedented political maneuver—one where even Smotrich and Hamas, knowingly or not, find themselves playing along.
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق