This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
In a move dense with symbolism and political calculation, President Donald Trump is in Egypt to celebrate the handover of Israeli hostages by Hamas. What is cast as a diplomatic triumph is, in reality, a performance piece designed to salvage reputations rather than achieve peace.
For two brutal years, Israel—with full US backing—pounded Gaza. Despite superior firepower, advanced surveillance, and staunch diplomatic protection, it failed to crush Hamas. The war left thousands dead and Gaza flattened. The final bargain: not conquest, but concession. Hamas is still upright and resilient.
Trump was never a neutral mediator. From weapons to intelligence-sharing to U.N. veto cover, his administration served as Israel’s war partner. His “peace rhetoric” often concealed complicity in Netanyahu’s war logic. He wasn’t brokering peace; he was underwriting Israel’s campaign.
Rebranding defeat as victory
With global attention focused on him, Trump makes his entrance to recast the story. He wants to turn an inconclusive war into a story of triumph. But battlefield assessments suggest otherwise: Hamas, while wounded, remains a wild card.
“Israel misjudged the resilience of the resistance,” recounts Israeli historian Ilan Pappé, noting how the campaign strengthened Hamas’s political identity even as it devastated Gaza. In Israel itself, Haaretz lambastes what it calls Netanyahu’s “strategic blindness,” warning that his military-first obsession has isolated Israel and left it less secure. The critique is no longer fringe; it’s becoming mainstream in Israeli discourse. Netanyahu’s boastful and unachievable goals may ultimately lead to his downfall. He never listened to Machiavelli: “The tongue has destroyed more men than the sword, for words once released can never be recalled”.
A Washington Post analysis frames Trump’s Gaza gambit as risk-laden: he may have coerced a settlement, but sustaining it demands pressure he may lack. The war may be paused, but the contradictions are unresolved.
Trump’s optics of redemption
This Egyptian excursion is more about spectacle than diplomacy. The stage is set; hostages are reunited, arms clasped, a president framed as a peacemaker. Yet touch the surface and you find the fissures.
An article by David Ignatius in The Washington Post praises Trump’s coalition-building but also notes his modus operandi: declare victory first, work out the details later. The inversion of selling the banner of peace before securing the foundation is the key to understanding this visit.
Former CIA analyst Graham E. Fuller warns: “Washington has burned moral capital defending Israel’s conduct—only to offer a ceasefire that everyone expects will collapse.” The optics may dazzle. The substance, however, is brittle.
READ: The defeat of Israel and the rebirth of Palestinian agency
Netanyahu’s survival pact
For Netanyahu, Trump’s arrival is a lifeline. His coalition teeters, public weariness grows, and international patience wanes. With Trump’s arrival, a deadlocked war becomes a shared pageant. A faltering gambit can be reframed as a shared triumph. If loyalty turns to envy, friends can become rivals.
But elites in Israel are whispering about failure. In The Times of Israel, a civil commission’s scathing report laments Netanyahu’s “arrogance and inherent blindness” in failing to prepare the country for the 7 October assault. He’s accused of undermining decision-making, sidelining security organs, and overcentralizing power. If very senior officials were barred from dissent, the political house was built on fear, not strategy.
Netanyahu needs Trump to save his skin and help reignite the narrative from gridlock to breakthrough, from defeat to deliverance. However, the miracle is contingent upon the illusions remaining solid. Netanyahu kept Trump in the dark during the war. He knows knowledge is a blade, and when you hand it freely, you place the weapon in your enemy’s hand.
Trump and Netanyahu are inevitably poised to exchange barbed accusations over Gaza’s unresolved chaos. That verbal exchange of blaming each other for Hamas’s survival, strategic missteps, and ignored counsel is looming on the horizon. Beneath the rhetoric simmers a quiet charge of betrayal, as both leaders subtly imply perfidy and failed promises, their alliance fraying under the weight of unmet expectations and diverging ambitions. Throughout the war, Netanyahu underestimated Presidents Biden and Trump, believing he could manipulate them as well as the US. Now he discovers that being underestimated is far safer than being fully known.
The pivot to Iran
The Gaza theatre will soon be over, and both men will pretend it never happened the way it did. Both men share the instinct to pivot—and nothing is more convenient than Iran. With Gaza’s devastation already disputed, Netanyahu is already telegraphing a shift to Tehran as the new existential rival. The script is familiar: rally behind a new threat, reset internal consensus.
Within US defense circles, pressure is mounting for a tougher stance on Iran. Israeli officials reportedly press Trump to re-impose sanctions, reassert deterrence, and prepare renewed confrontation. “Gaza needs to be forgotten. Iran must be next,” said an anonymous defense analyst quoted in strategic coverage. This is not a war of necessity, but a war of distraction: personal survival masquerading as a national imperative. Trump, ever the opportunist, may again be lured into conflict he helped mismanage, chasing legacy on borrowed time.
Conclusion: The mirage of victory
No statue in Cairo will change Gaza’s rubble. No press conference will erase the war’s toll. History judges more slowly than headlines. It is Trump’s turn to quote the author of The Prince: “Power does not belong to the one who speaks loudly, but to the one who withholds”.
Trump may strut down a tarmac, declare peace, and bask in the global applause. However, the pieces left behind—displacement, devastation, silent tunnels, and the political phoenix of resistance—testify to a war that remains unresolved. Until genuine leadership replaces spectacle, peace will remain a prop rather than a policy.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
