Trump, Gaza, Israel: A Blank Check’s Perils
Trump’s Gaza “Muddle-Through” Strategy: Aiding and Abetting the Crisis?
Table of Contents
Donald Trump’s approach to the ongoing conflict in Gaza has drawn increasing scrutiny, wiht critics arguing that his “situationalist” stance, characterized by a willingness to enable Israeli prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has exacerbated the humanitarian crisis and damaged Israel’s international standing. While support for Israel’s military actions remains strong among Republicans, a growing number are reportedly questioning the long-term consequences of a “Trumpian blank check” for Netanyahu.
The Unspoken Cost of Unwavering Support
The devastating images emerging from Gaza have lead to a notable shift, with some Republicans now expressing reservations about Israel’s conduct. However, what remains unsaid, according to analysts, is the extent to which Donald trump’s past actions and rhetoric have contributed to the dire conditions on the ground. For those in Washington who continue to support Israel, a new fear has taken root: that Trump’s unqualified backing may ultimately prove detrimental to Israel’s interests.
“He bears a lot of responsibility for where we’ve arrived at, including how negative the consequences have been for Israel, in terms of the pressure that’s now on it and the reputational damage it’s now enduring,” stated a source familiar with the matter.
The “U.S.-Scripted Off-ramp” Dilemma
Historically, Israel’s conflicts in recent decades have often concluded with a “U.S.-scripted off-ramp.” This dynamic, deeply embedded in the political relationship between the United States and Israel, typically requires the Israeli Prime Minister to appear to be acting under U.S. pressure. This “built into the DNA” approach ensures a degree of international legitimacy and a path towards de-escalation.
Though, there is little indication that trump, despite recent critical remarks about famine in Gaza, is prepared to exert such pressure. Aaron David Miller, a veteran Middle East peace negotiator who served under six U.S. Secretaries of State, argues that Trump’s perceived ideological support for Israel masks a more pragmatic, albeit potentially damaging, “situationalist” approach.
“The problem… is not that Trump won’t confront Netanyahu but that he is too often mistaken for an ideological supporter of Israel rather than a pragmatic ‘situationalist,’ one whose ‘gut’ and ‘instincts lend him to a view of enabling and acquiescing in what Netanyahu is doing,'” Miller explained. Trump’s repeated emphasis on Israel’s need to “finish the job” and his past advice to “let all hell break out” underscore this permissive stance.
The “Muddle-through” Reality
Given the protracted nature of the conflict, neither an all-out Israeli victory nor a comprehensive peace deal appears realistic in the immediate future. A more probable scenario, according to observers, involves Trump and his associates facilitating an interim accord.Such an agreement might allow for increased humanitarian aid to reach Gaza and potentially secure the release of more hostages held by Hamas.
Miller characterizes Trump’s strategy as a “muddle-through option on Gaza,” a far cry from the “breakthrough” or even “breakdown” scenarios that might necessitate decisive action. This approach, while avoiding immediate escalation, fails to address the underlying issues and offers little in the way of a lasting resolution.The unfulfilled promises of a past “EPIC” ceasefire, brokered by Trump’s team, now stand in stark contrast to his current passive stance. As the summer unfolds with continued horror in Gaza, the question remains: could a more engaged and assertive U.S. policy have averted the current crisis? The current “muddle-through” approach,critics contend,is not only insufficient but actively contributes to the ongoing suffering and instability.