It doesnât surprise me, I remember being disappointed when Trump gave the liberal Kushner a role in his first term, and was glad he stayed out of the picture in his second term - til now.
Probably the only reason they had any success in their negotiating was because they had Trumpâs strength to prop them up, and, as this writer points out, Israelâs attack on the Hamas leaders to bring the Arab negotiators in line.
Selection from the linked article:
Responding to the comment that Trump âwas furious,â Kushner offered, âI think he [President Trump] felt like the Israelis were getting a little bit out of control in what they were doing, and that it was time to be very strong and stop them from doing things that he felt were not in their long-term interests."
Their comments place responsibility for jeopardizing the peace process squarely in Israeli hands, even though there was literally no traction for peace on the Arab worldâs part up until the Doha attack.
Their comments perpetuate the misguided belief that, while the October 7th massacre was wrong and bad and, yes, it would be nice if the hostages could be released (but Bibi was preventing that for his personal political gain), Israel had lost the public relations war and had completely lost the moral high ground.
As if Israel has ever been on the winning side of the public relations war.
The politically astute response from Witkoff and Kushner should have been âYes, the attack in Doha on September 9th had the potential to upend negotiations, but Netanyahu apologized, refrained from further incursions against Hamas leaders living in Qatar, and this catapulted the negotiations to a speedy and positive conclusion.â
This would not have been a bending of the knee to Israelâs detractors, but would have been truthful, would have addressed the issue directly, and would not have provided Israelâs critics with additional ammunition.
Comment:
In my irritated voice: Israel âgetting a little bit out ofâ President Trumpâs âcontrolâ? Americaâs control? Is Israel normally under his/its control? Or is he/it more aptly described as Israelâs strong ally?
In my approving voice: For the next three quoted paragraphs, yes. I agree.
In my irritated voice again: Netanyahu apologized. He did indeed, and that was shattering news.
His apology âcatapulted the negotiations to a speedy and positive conclusionâ? It was not âa bending of the knee to Israelâs detractorsâ? It âwould have been truthfulâ? Oh? Whatever makes the writer think so?
Do Israelâs critics need âadditional ammunitionâ? They make it up all the time anyway.
However, Iâm glad to see the âdealâ criticized, even if the criticism is only partly apt.
I agree with you, Cogito, that those two are not trustworthy. The whole episode hurts (not just me but) the cause.
I was as amazed as I was delighted that the living hostages were returned to Israel.
We are told that Hamas did it because they fear Trump.
And after that ? Now their fear stops?
I have no faith in the âdealâ.
I long to see President Trumpâs release of hell on the Hamas savages.
After which - if it happens ⌠? Quo vadis?
Itâs just a matter of time before Hamas attacks Israel again, and Trump has already said theyâll be killed if they do. So Iâm pretty sure hell will be released - its just a question of how much!
And the detractors canât make up their minds - theyâve been claiming Israel controls the US, now they imply Trump controls Israel except for this.
Just whatever fits the latest event - but itâs always Israelâs fault.
I have heard also that Witkoff said he bonded with the Hamas negotiator because they had both lost sons.
Good grief, Cogito!
That is outrageous!
The Hamas son is the enemy. Iâm sure you agree that what those savages did to their captives on and after October 7, 2023, dooms them all to the justice of merciless destruction.
They are continuing to torture and murder. They never stopped.
Thatâs why I disagree with President Trump and his Vice President that the âdealâ will hold. It never stood a chance. There is no deal possible with savages.