WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed peacemaker who has campaigned for a Nobel Prize, finally got a camera-ready diplomatic victory on Monday as world leaders flew to Egypt for the signing of the ceasefire and hostage-release deal he brokered between Israel and Hamas.
But if lasting peace is to take root, analysts and diplomats say, Trump will have to maintain pressure on the man whose support he’ll need in the next phases of his plan: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
US presidents from Bill Clinton to Joe Biden have found the strong-willed Israeli leader difficult to work with, and even Trump administration officials have been frustrated by some Israeli military strikes they see as undermining US policy.
But this month Trump managed to push Netanyahu into accepting his framework for a broader peace deal while persuading other Middle Eastern countries to convince Hamas to return all the Israeli hostages, its key leverage in the war.
The work could get harder from here, however.
Israel and Hamas remain sharply divided over many aspects of Trump’s 20-point plan and, as Israel prepares for next year’s elections, Netanyahu’s approach may shift as he attempts to keep his right-wing coalition together.
“We’re entering a political year where everything is related to campaigns, and Netanyahu’s calculations may flip from caving to pressure to trying to ensure his political survival,” said Nimrod Goren, the president of Mitvim, an Israeli foreign policy think tank.
The strength of Trump’s peace plan, said the diplomats and analysts, is also its weakness.
The document at the heart of the deal leaves much undefined, and neither side actually agreed to the fine print of each term. That vagueness was key to getting both sides to sign on, but it also means some of the most difficult diplomatic work is just beginning.
Among the potential sticking points of Trump’s peace plan is an agreement that Hamas disarm and play no role in Gaza’s future administration. While Hamas agreed to Trump’s plan generally, the group’s official response made no mention of those specific terms, and Hamas leaders have indicated that they do in fact see a role for themselves in governing a post-war Gaza.
“There are any number of ways this could go sideways,” said Jon Alterman, a Middle East expert at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies and a former State Department official.
“It’s hard to remember an international agreement that left so much to be worked out later.”
The Israeli embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A senior US official suggested that Trump had gained influence with Netanyahu in part by strongly supporting Israel on other important matters.
Trump’s first administration formally recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the disputed Golan Heights as part of the country, two things long sought by the Israeli government.
“One thing President Trump’s done with Israel ... is that he’s not trying to be a middle-of-the-roader,” the US official said. “He’s basically stood shoulder to shoulder with Israel 100 percent. But because of that, he’s been able to help guide them in the right direction.”
A sterner Trump
Trump has a mixed record when it comes to applying political pressure on Netanyahu.
In July, Israel bombed the Syrian defense ministry in Damascus even as the US had made a point of expanding ties with the new Syrian government. The US president gave political cover in Gaza to Netanyahu for months amid mounting humanitarian concerns among European and Arab allies.
But in recent weeks, a sterner Trump has emerged. He forced Netanyahu to call the leader of Qatar to apologize after a failed bombing raid targeting Hamas negotiators in that country in September. Ultimately, he muscled Netanyahu into signing onto his 20-point plan despite the Israeli leader’s misgivings.
At the moment, said Alterman, the Middle East expert, Trump can likely exert leverage over Netanyahu given the US president’s significant popularity in Israel.
“Trump’s greatest leverage is he’s much more politically popular in Israel than Netanyahu,” Alterman said, “and he can either support Netanyahu’s political future or sabotage it.”
At the speech before the Israeli parliament on Monday, Trump playfully poked at the Israeli leader in ways that indicated he did not feel the need to treat Netanyahu with special deference.
“Well, see, now you can be a little bit nicer, Bibi, because you’re not at war anymore,” Trump said to laughs.
But next year’s elections could change Netanyahu’s political calculations in ways that are difficult to predict.
Supporters of right-wing politicians Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich could in theory threaten Netanyahu’s governing coalition if they are sufficiently angered by the decision to halt military operations against Hamas.
Analysts warn that foot-dragging by the Palestinian group over disarming could lead right-wing elements of the coalition to pressure Netanyahu to resume military operations in Gaza, effectively scuttling Trump’s deal.
“We are troubled with the fact that Hamas still, today, declares it will stay in power in Gaza,” Simcha Rothman, a member of the Religious Zionism party and of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, said on Monday.
“We are not happy with any deal that is not total surrender of Hamas ... We will not accept any partial victory.”
Another issue that could prove an irritant: a provision in the peace plan that admits the possibility of a future Palestinian state, which analysts say most Israelis would struggle to accept after Hamas’ cross-border attack of October 7, 2023.
Dan Shapiro, a former US ambassador to Israel, said that if government and opposition politicians’ campaign heavily against the creation of such a state, it could limit the willingness of Arab countries to push Hamas to fulfill its obligations under Trump’s deal.
“That was a very important inclusion to get the support of the Arab states to do their part,” Shapiro said.
“If the political discourse is a full-on rejection of a Palestinian state for all time, I think that could color the enthusiasm of the Arab parties to play the parts that they need to play.”