Netanyahu goes to Mar-a-Lago

If there is a favorite place in the world where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu loves to spend time, it is the US. Elsewhere, especially in Israel, he has perfected the role of the indignant rogue. According to Netanyahu and his supporters, he has been wronged by the legal system that indicted him for corruption; he and his family are mistreated by his political opponents and the media; and the mere idea that he should take the blame for anything that goes wrong in the country, including the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks, is preposterous.
Furthermore, he is resentful at not receiving the credit he thinks he deserves for strengthening Israel's position by changing the security architecture of the Middle East. But all of this is different in the US, where he believes he has built a close relationship with President Donald Trump and his administration, as well as with certain sections of the media and the public.
Hence, Trump’s invitation to Netanyahu to visit the US for the sixth time since the former returned to the White House was eagerly accepted by the Israeli prime minister, more so as he would be able to extend his and his wife’s stay to spend New Year’s Eve in the glitzy black-tie celebration at Mar-a-Lago. Admittedly, the relationship between the two leaders seems close, but given the characters involved, there is a subtext in which they play each other to advance their own interests, while showering each other with praise. Despite this, there is a worrying lack of progress on pressing issues.
What was at stake in the discussions between the two leaders is crucial for the rest of the Middle East, and most urgently for progress on the Gaza ceasefire. For now, there seems to be no sense of urgency among the decision-makers involved to take the second phase forward, and as we witnessed recently with events in Venezuela and Ukraine, the agenda and focus can quickly shift in Washington and internationally. Consequently, there is a real risk that Gaza, its people, and advancing a path towards a two-state solution will be abandoned. 

Netanyahu returned to Israel triumphantly, believing that Israel’s main ally is entirely aligned with him.

Yossi Mekelberg

 

Trump told reporters that he planned to speak with Netanyahu about “five major subjects,” including Gaza, the West Bank, Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, and later claimed that they had agreed almost immediately on three of these, leaving the remaining areas of agreement and disagreement vague. On Gaza, and especially Hamas, it seems that Washington and Israel are aligned, which might suggest a long impasse and even renewed hostilities. It is likely, although extremely damaging, that for their own different reasons both Israeli and Hamas leaderships would rather maintain the situation as it is in Gaza than agree on how to move forward.
It has become clear that Netanyahu and his government oppose a complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. In a recent statement, Israeli military chief Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir told soldiers that the Yellow Line now separating Israel and Hamas in Gaza is the “new border” for Israel. Zamir’s political superior, Defense Minister Israel Katz, has been more reckless, repeatedly insisting that Israel will never fully withdraw and should build settlements there. This is not what the Trump plan says, and there is no suggestion that in the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu the latter was challenged about that.
On the other side of the Yellow Line, Hamas — seeking to stay in control of the population and remain politically relevant — continues to be ambiguous about its commitment to disarm. Trump insisted that if it continues in this vein, Hamas would be wiped out, which suggests a resumption of the war, in which neither side would be better off. Instead of the use of force, there is an urgent need to find a political formula by which this Islamist movement never again poses a military threat to Israel, a Palestinian technocratic government is enabled to take over, and an international peace enforcement body is deployed, followed by Israel's withdrawal from Gaza.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also met with Netanyahu on this occasion, said that these are Washington’s top priorities, but unless there is a different approach behind closed doors, there is a real danger that Netanyahu will ignore the push to change course — not only on Gaza but also the West Bank, where Trump was clear that he opposed any Israeli attempt to annex the territory. Yet, all the US leader was prepared to say on the issue was that he and Netanyahu disagree “on the West Bank 100 percent.” It will be a real worry if they agree on anything there, considering the continuing expansion of Israeli settlements and the increase in settler violence, both of which threaten Trump’s declared intention to bring this conflict to an end.
The US leader is no stranger to expressing views that are wishful rather than factual, and this seemed to be the case when he declared after their meeting that Netanyahu is “going to get along” with Syria. Trump’s growing ties with Syrian leader Ahmed Al-Sharaa are well documented. Still, it is hard to see how the Syrian president can get along with someone who attacked his country and expanded its territory there.
Furthermore, for the region, Trump giving Israel the green light to attack Iran if the Tehran regime continues to develop long-range missiles must be alarming since it suggests there is no diplomatic route to prevent this. Doubts over Iran’s intentions are understandable, but as its domestic unrest gathers momentum, any external military attack could be counterproductive for the protesters in the street. In the meantime, a diplomatic path has not even begun, let alone a new agreement with Tehran over its nuclear and missile development, or its support for subversive allies in the region.
For now, Netanyahu returned to Israel triumphantly, believing that Israel’s main ally is entirely aligned with him. The US president even reiterated his request to the Israeli president to pardon Netanyahu. Trump’s plea has no legal standing; however, if he wants to achieve his goals in the region, he should have whispered in Netanyahu’s ear that the Israeli leader’s best chances of a pardon are if he admits guilt and leaves politics. This, in turn, would serve the US, Israel, and the rest of the region’s interests on the path of peace and normalization.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg