OP-ED: Trump deserves credit for Gaza but not Nobel Prize
Recent international events paint a complicated picture of the president’s values and goals. When it comes to the Gaza ceasefire and the Nobel Peace Prize, is Donald Trump one who personifies the peace prize qualification of “fraternity between nations” or are his actions only about drama and fragile, short-term deals?
On the one hand, despite all of his faults and the domestic and international carnage caused by his policies, the Trump administration has achieved an historic breakthrough on the war in Gaza. For his diplomatic actions, the president deserves all the accolades he is receiving from Israel, the Middle East, and around the world.
On Oct. 13, Hamas released all 20 of the last living hostages, and Palestinian prisoners were returned to Gaza. The same day, Trump flew to Israel and Egypt to praise his own efforts and to sign a peace deal, though not the 20-point plan he wanted. A week after the signing, the truce appeared tenuous, when Israel launched attacks and halted aid into Gaza.
The violence began two years ago with the worst mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust. The Israeli response has killed over 60,000 in Gaza and 1.9 million have been displaced. Now that the shooting has stopped, serious challenges lie ahead, leaving many unanswered questions. However, the exchange of hostages and prisoners is significant in itself and marks a key first step.
Trump’s administration was largely responsible for this landmark development. Envoys, Steve Witkoff and the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, entered the negotiations when they were deadlocked to work out final details. Back at the White House, a critical turning point occurred when Trump strong-armed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to apologize to Qatar for an air strike against Hamas negotiators in its capital, Doha.
The citizens of Israel view Trump and his team in heroic terms for getting the hostages released. However, there is much work to be done before Trump’s claim of “everlasting peace” becomes a reality. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu appears ready to resume the fighting at the least provocation.
Why the breakthrough now? I am inclined to agree with the analysis of the Economist digital editor, Roger McShane, that some of Trump’s most negative characteristics of bullying, being transactional rather than visionary and his narcissism have actually assisted in reaching a ceasefire. McShane concludes,”The choreography of the negotiations, with so much pressure applied to both sides, Mr. Trump’s willingness to push Israel hard, and the enlistment of Gulf Arab states not only to pay for Gaza’s reconstruction, but to underwrite a peace process and perhaps help provide security – these are huge steps forward, possible only because of this administration’s efforts. Whether or not Mr. Trump deserves a Nobel prize, he certainly deserves praise.”
It must be said that the Trump approach, while successful in the short term, is a far cry from the sustained economic and diplomatic commitment needed to make a lasting peace. Such a level of commitment is not a hallmark of Trump or his MAGA followers. However, at this moment, I applaud Trump’s work in creating possibilities for a new beginning in the Middle East, while remaining a fierce critic of his authoritarian, domestic policies.
No doubt, the president is seething that his diplomatic efforts did not land him the Nobel Peace Prize, announced on Oct. 10. The award will be presented to Maria Corina Machado “for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.”
The irony is that Trump has recently been anything but peaceful toward Venezuela. His administration has halted diplomatic contacts, increased intelligence activity, deployed military assets throughout the Caribbean, and mounted at least five military actions against its citizens in international waters.
In fact, Trump sealed his own fate in being denied the Peace Prize. First, before the recent peace initiative, Trump’s Mideast position was to “give war a chance” by often categorically supporting Israel and sending bombers to attack Iran’s nuclear program.
Second, at a press conference last month, the president proclaimed that the Department of Defense would thereafter be known as the Department of War. Third, his newly anointed Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, proclaimed that the armed forces would henceforth deliver “maximum lethality” that would “not be politically correct.”
Fourth, Trump ordered drone strikes on several small boats headed out of Venezuela suspected of drug trafficking. This violent alternative to inspecting the boats killed almost all on board in what some legal and defense experts consider a war crime.
Fifth, at a recent conclave of all active serving generals and admirals, the president announced a new plan for using American cities that object to his immigration policies as training grounds for the military. He told the assembly, “That’s a war too. It’s from within.”
Lastly, Trump’s Border Patrol officials announced that a marine unit would be relocated to Chicago. The explanation was that Chicago’s lakes and rivers are borders (with Michigan, not a foreign country).
Attacks on revered democratic institutions, bombing Iran, provoking hostilities in our own hemisphere, and the fabrication of domestic war zones do not build an ideal resume for winning the Nobel Peace Prize. One can only guess what opportunities three more years of a Trump White House will bring.
Gary Stout is a Washington attorney.