Political Theater on Gaza: The Trump-Netanyahu Ceasefire Deal

By Robert Inlakesh

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. (Photo: Wikimedia)

Results on the ground are the only thing that can be trusted. What we hear from the US and Israeli corporate media must be taken with a grain of salt, while Trump and Netanyahu’s words are all but meaningless.

In the immediate aftermath of the 12-day battle between Israel and Iran, US President Donald Trump shifted his focus on allegedly pursuing a ceasefire in Gaza. Despite the benefits for all sides, in the event of a durable ceasefire, we are yet to see tangible steps taken to bring the genocide to a close.

At the beginning of July, Donald Trump released a post of “Truth Social” claiming that Israel had agreed upon a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza, adding that “I hope… that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better – IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,” in the Republican Party President’s typical style of social media diplomacy.

Yet, since the beginning of the month, it has become clear that the Israelis never accepted any ceasefire proposal formally and have continued to add conditions to the proposal, which are evident non-starters for Hamas.

The Hamas position is very clear: they seek a prisoner exchange but value a comprehensive agreement to end the war entirely and will not back down from this position. The Palestinian political party has also repeatedly expressed its readiness to hand power over to a domestically led governing body, which would be a precursor to a Palestinian government following free and fair democratic elections.

Israel, on the other hand, is not even willing to implement a deal that would replicate the one implemented upon Trump’s inauguration in late January. It has created the so-called Morag Corridor that bisects southern Gaza, adding to its scheme of territorial separation inside the besieged coastal territory.

During the ceasefire negotiations in 2024, the big sticking points were Israel’s withdrawal from the Netzarim and Philadelphi corridors. At the time, policy makers in Tel Aviv argued that it would prove difficult to return to occupying these dividing line positions inside Gaza in the event of war and made a big deal about how integral these corridors were to “security”, which it is now also claiming about the newly built Morag Corridor.

On March 18, Israel unilaterally tore up the Gaza ceasefire, which was met with American acquiescence. The Israeli military had withdrawn from both Philadelphi and Netzarim, yet began returning to these positions within days, debunking their own notions that withdrawal made reoccupying the area difficult.

In other words, there are no real obstacles on the ground to a ceasefire. Hamas will cede power; there are ample investors and aid organizations willing to help, while the Israeli military has no real excuses in terms of military concessions. Whether we will see a ceasefire is down to whether Tel Aviv wants it or its allies in Washington force it.

Will There Be a Ceasefire and Why?

In order to assess whether a ceasefire is likely, we have to factor in what could shape such a decision. The first is what the Israelis and Americans can get out of it and why.

For Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu, a ceasefire could rupture his ruling coalition and cause a political schism with the most hardline elements of his right-wing alliance, which could end up translating to a loss in any future elections.

Thus far, the Israeli prime minister has failed to achieve his stated war goals after 22 months of inflicting one of the worst atrocities in modern history upon the people of Gaza. He is currently using an ISIS-linked militia that is composed of hardened criminal collaborators in Gaza, while his US allies are helping to run the so-called “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” (GHF).

The Trump administration recently injected 30 million dollars in its people’s tax dollars to finance the scheme that has been condemned by over 160 NGO’s and labelled a “death trap”. Meanwhile, the occupying army is setting up concentration camps for Gaza’s civilian population and desperately attempting to find a new method for ethnically cleansing the territory.

Yet, following the battle with Iran, Netanyahu saw both a rise in support for his right-wing coalition, in addition to a rise in popular support amongst Israelis for ending the war in Gaza. Therefore, the personal political incentive for him would be to close the war on Gaza, return the captives through a prisoner exchange, and focus on Tehran instead.

Benjamin Netanyahu admitted that Iran’s enriched Uranium stockpile survived the Israeli-US attacks on the Iranian nuclear facilities, while his Defense Minister, Israel Katz, has claimed that the strategy on combating Tehran’s nuclear program is similar to getting rid of cancer, hinting at future strikes.

Furthermore, the issue of Hezbollah in the north is still clearly a major priority for the Israelis, and their continued illegal occupation of southern Syria enables military action in Lebanon that could come from the Bekaa Valley region on the ground, perhaps even in concert with armed efforts from forces loyal to Ahmed al-Shara’a.

Syria is clearly allied with Israel against Iranian-aligned groups – Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance – presenting an opening that may not exist in the future, given the shaky situation for the pro-US leadership in Damascus.

Israel’s primary concerns are therefore fighting against Hezbollah and Iran. If Gaza is taken out of the situation, this could potentially negate the possibility of having to fight a multifront ground war in the north and south in the future, while also taking Yemen’s Ansarallah out of the picture at least temporarily.

Although the occupied West Bank could surprise Tel Aviv with a shock uprising, it appears as if the territory has been successfully pacified with the help of the Palestinian Authority for the time being. Even a large-scale annexation of Area C of the West Bank (60% of the territory), may not translate into any meaningful popular resistance there.

A major challenge to the Israeli occupiers in the West Bank cannot be ruled out, however, as the October 2015 Knife Intifada demonstrated to be the case. Quite suddenly and for reasons which can only be understood in hindsight, there can be an uprising that comes out of nowhere.

This being said, nobody is expecting the West Bank to be a major factor in the foreseeable future. Therefore, taking the resistance in the Gaza Strip out of the multi-front war would make perfect strategic sense for the leadership in Tel Aviv.

From the US perspective, ending the genocide in Gaza would obviously carry many benefits. Israel has lost popular support in the United States, so on a domestic level, the Trump administration would benefit in the court of public opinion. Also, the US would appear strong over their Israeli allies, especially as many Americans have begun to question who really controls the foreign policy positions of their President.

Washington could also then pave the way towards a proper Syria-Israel normalization agreement, while working on bringing Saudi Arabia into their so-called “Abraham Accords” alliance. There is no real downside to ending the Gaza genocide from a purely US perspective at that point, as their attempt to achieve total regional dominance can be achieved against Iran and Hezbollah, in theory, not in the Gaza Strip against Hamas.

All of the motivators towards achieving a ceasefire are there. But we have to understand that the mere fact that it isn’t happening means that the US and Israel don’t actually want one yet. If Washington and Tel Aviv wanted a lasting ceasefire, it would be announced within a few days and implemented soon thereafter. Even if Israel said no, the US could force it with a single phone call.

Political Theater

During the course of the Biden administration’s rule, post October 7, 2023, we heard time and time again about “imminent” ceasefires and the various efforts of US negotiations “working around the clock” to end the war. It would later be revealed through reports published by Israel’s Channel 13 and Drop Site News that the Biden government never asked for Israel to end the war, long after it became aware that there were no clear war goals in Gaza.

Donald Trump’s announcements and the reports about “officials” and “leaks” should also be assumed to be similarly deceptive. These are all part of a show that is being put on for public consumption.

There is also a precedent for this kind of political theatre during the Trump administration’s reign in power too. This was exactly what we saw in the lead-up to Israel’s surprise attack against Iran. The US and Israeli media were constantly leaking reports that Trump was fighting with Netanyahu, some Zionist propaganda outlets even produced outlandish claims that Washington was set to recognize a Palestinian State.

Above and beyond all is the way that Israeli society sees this situation, which is the primary motivator for the theatre we are seeing. The talk of imminent agreements over the Gaza war keeps the pressure off of Netanyahu, while he continues to scheme on how to continue his regime change efforts against Iran.

There is a significant portion of the Israeli population that desperately wants to see an end to the war, for two reasons: Because they seek the return of the captives, and also due to their frustration at the frequent deaths of soldiers who are being caught in ambushes by the Palestinian resistance each day.

Israel has already lost the military war in Gaza and has been incapable of executing the ethnic cleansing program that they have sought since 2023. The Israeli public does not have the determination to fight and wants easy solutions that don’t carry consequences.

Benjamin Netanyahu understands his delusional population better than anyone else and has proven capable of duping the genocidal citizenry. If there is going to be a ceasefire, the US and Israel will make it happen; otherwise, everything we are seeing just needs to be viewed as part of a script.

Results on the ground are the only thing that can be trusted. What we hear from the US and Israeli corporate media must be taken with a grain of salt, while Trump and Netanyahu’s words are all but meaningless.

(The Palestine Chronicle)

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.