Deal Maneuvers: Trump Buys Time for Netanyahu

Dr. Suhail Diab: The current impasse is a direct result of Netanyahu's "fatal hesitation," as he finds himself facing a complex dilemma that forces him to choose between conflicting scenarios.
Akram Atallah: The apparent allegations of tension or rift between Trump and Netanyahu are part of a tactical maneuver and deception to buy time or send misleading messages to the world.
Dr. Dalal Erekat: What is being presented today as an "agreement" is merely a political cover for the occupation to continue displacement and settlement...and there are no real negotiations.
Muhammad Hawash: Netanyahu is using stalling tactics in negotiations to impose conditions that will enable him to claim "complete victory" over the Palestinians.
Dr. Aqel Salah: Trump is giving Netanyahu enough time to continue the war on the Gaza Strip by deluding the international community into believing there are serious negotiations.
Naaman Abed: The suggestion of serious negotiations contributed to mitigating the shift in the West's view of Israel as a state accused of genocide in international courts.


As negotiations for an agreement to end the war of annihilation in the Gaza Strip falter, questions are growing about the truth behind US President Donald Trump's promises that an agreement is imminent. Despite his repeated statements about an "imminent" agreement to end the war, the facts confirm that these promises may be little more than a media bargaining chip designed to manage regional tensions and buy time for Israel.
In separate interviews with "I," writers, political analysts, specialists, and university professors believe that the Trump administration has not exerted any real pressure on the Israeli government to accept an agreement to end the war on the Gaza Strip. Instead, it has granted it unprecedented political and military cover.
They explain that the Trump administration has exploited the notion of a "close agreement" to ease international pressure on Israel in the courts and human rights bodies, leveraging the media buzz to project a false commitment to ending tensions. However, behind closed doors, close coordination continues between Washington and Tel Aviv to establish red lines that prevent any settlement that does not guarantee continued Israeli control over the territory.

Hamas has offered more than it could offer.

Political science professor and Israeli affairs expert Dr. Suhail Diab says that the current negotiations are stalled not because of mutual conditions between the Netanyahu government and Hamas, but because the real stumbling block lies within Israel and in the relationship between Netanyahu and the US administration.
Diab points out that Hamas has offered more than it could on all issues, but the current impasse is a direct result of Netanyahu's "fatal hesitation," who finds himself, for the first time since 1996, facing a complex dilemma that forces him to choose between conflicting scenarios.
Diab points out that Netanyahu's ability to manipulate Israeli society, the military, his ruling coalition, the US administration, and even international public opinion and mediators has been completely exhausted. Everyone, including the United States, has come to realize that the only obstacle to reaching any deal is Netanyahu himself.
Diab cites a recent extensive report by the New York Times, documented with facts and evidence, detailing how Netanyahu has undermined every agreement since April 2024. He asserts that Netanyahu's return from his recent visit to Washington without any joint statement or press conference with US President Donald Trump confirms that things were not going well between them, neither regarding the Gaza issue nor the Iranian nuclear issue.
Diab asserts that Netanyahu's conditions, such as disarming Hamas or withdrawing the movement from Gaza, reveal the depth of his hesitation and his surrender to pressure from the Israeli far right, which threatens to bring down his government.

"What she took is hers and what remains is negotiable."

Diab explains that this mentality is not new to official Israeli thought, recalling how Israeli control over the land has evolved since the 1947 Partition Plan. Israel began with 45% of historic Palestine, then grew to 55%, then to 78% after the 1948 Nakba. After the 1967 war, it expanded to more than 83% of the land.
Diab emphasizes that Israel follows a political principle that states, "Whatever it takes is its own, and whatever remains can be negotiated," considering that talk of "compromises" in this context is nothing more than a cover for actual surrender.
Diab believes that while Netanyahu is desperate for a deal now, he cannot directly reject Trump's demands. Instead, he finds himself trapped between pressure from the US administration, which has not yet decided its position internally due to divisions between Congress, Trump, and the Zionist lobby within the Republican Party, and the constraints of the Israeli military, which understands better than most that military escalation no longer offers Israel any political gains.
Diab points out that the last month in particular, since the beginning of June, has clearly revealed this contradiction, as the increased military pressure on Gaza has had the opposite effect, resulting in a deterioration in Israel's political position and significant losses for the army, which have impacted the morale and level of preparedness of its soldiers.
Diab asserts that the current American position is unlike the American position at previous critical moments, such as when Trump asked Netanyahu to stop the war with Iran, and the fighting ceased in less than an hour.
Today, Diab believes that Netanyahu's hesitation and the lack of American decisiveness place Israel at a dangerous and fateful crossroads, where Netanyahu will have only two options: either move toward a genuine détente through a deal that forces him to make difficult internal concessions, or head toward a widespread explosion that will have unforeseen repercussions for Israel and the entire region.


Netanyahu seeks to impose a "humiliating" agreement on Hamas

For his part, writer and political analyst Akram Atallah asserts that the optimistic expectations promoted by US President Donald Trump regarding the imminent conclusion of an agreement between Israel and Hamas have not materialized. He explains that the main reason for this is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to impose a "humiliating" agreement on Hamas, one that would legitimize the continued presence of Israeli occupation forces in large areas of the Gaza Strip with the approval of the movement itself.
Atallah explains that Netanyahu is proposing a formula for an agreement that would entail the severing of the governorates of Rafah, Beit Hanoun, and Beit Lahia, in addition to a large portion of the Gaza Strip's eastern border. This raises real concerns that this severing could become permanent, formally and dangerously legitimizing the Israeli presence. He considers this the dilemma Netanyahu has posed as a "sawk" to any serious negotiations.
Atallah asserts that Netanyahu wants an agreement that is closer to surrender, and if he fails to obtain one, he is prepared to continue the war without hesitation to appease the extreme right-wing factions in his government, led by Bezalel Smotrich.
Atallah points out that Netanyahu sees no problem with continuing military operations as long as they serve his political and security goals, emphasizing that the overwhelming support he receives from Trump gives him broad latitude to act in this manner.

Anyone who thinks that Trump might pressure Netanyahu is delusional.

Regarding the relationship between Trump and Netanyahu, Atallah explains that it is a mistake to believe there are real differences between them or that Trump might pressure Netanyahu to make concessions.
Atallah considers the relationship between Netanyahu and Trump to be complementary, based on an exchange of roles, with each party complementing the other to achieve common goals. He asserts that Trump represents an "executive arm" of Netanyahu's policies on major issues, whether the Palestinian issue, Iran, or others.
Atallah emphasizes that the apparent claims or statements about tension or a rift between Trump and Netanyahu are merely part of a tactical maneuver and calculated political deception aimed at buying time or conveying misleading messages to the world.
Atallah explains that Netanyahu himself stated that the understanding between him and Trump extends beyond strategic issues, but also encompasses tactical details, making their relationship part of a "role-playing game" to achieve Israeli interests without retreat or real pressure.


Trump buys more time for Israel

For her part, Dr. Dalal Erekat, professor of diplomacy and conflict resolution at the Arab American University, believes the lack of real progress in the negotiations is primarily due to the fact that the Palestinians are not even a party to the proposals. She believes that the promises made by US President Donald Trump regarding the imminent conclusion of an agreement are nothing more than public relations tools used to deceive Palestinian and Arab public opinion and buy more time for Israel.
Erekat emphasizes that the Palestinian people are living in a state of forced anticipation, as if they are required to await the results of a political process in which they were not a party to the original plan. She points out that what is being presented cannot be described as a genuine agreement, but rather is a clear attempt to impose a fait accompli through a flawed settlement that is completely biased toward the Israeli occupation, under the misleading title of "agreement."
Erekat explains that the Trump administration, since taking office, has fully embraced the Israeli right-wing narrative, thereby disregarding international legitimacy and relevant UN resolutions, thus stripping the entire process of any political credibility.
Erekat explained that the policy of systematic displacement of Palestinians has never ceased. Indeed, Israeli settlement activity has expanded at an accelerating pace under American cover. The US administration has not exerted any real pressure on Israel, but has instead legitimized the occupation and opened the door for it to implement its expansionist plans without restraint.

An ideological and strategic alliance between Trump and Netanyahu

Erekat asserts that President Trump has not lost his ability to exert pressure, but rather did not seek to subjugate Netanyahu or push him toward a just settlement.
Erekat believes that what happened was nothing more than an ideological and strategic alliance between Trump and Netanyahu, based on an exchange of roles that served the agendas of both parties. On the one hand, Trump needed to capitalize on any foreign achievements to bolster his domestic campaigns, while on the other, Netanyahu benefited from unconditional American support to bolster his expansionist projects and legitimize further control over Palestinian territory.
Erekat believes that what is being presented today as an "agreement" is merely a political cover for continued displacement and settlement activity, emphasizing that calling things by their proper names is essential at this stage, as there are no real negotiations at hand, as much as there is a systematic attempt to impose a settlement that would end the Palestinian issue without ending the occupation itself.
Erekat asserts that the Palestinian people's rejection of this path and their steadfastness despite ongoing pressure is the primary factor thwarting these deals, not the absence of American will or the lack of leverage, as some claim.


The "compromise" is essentially a purely Israeli idea.

For his part, writer and political analyst Mohammed Hawash asserts that preliminary talks on a ceasefire agreement in Gaza are still ongoing and progressing at a rapid pace through multiple mediators, including the United States, Israel, Qatar, Egypt, and Hamas.
Hawash explains that American envoys are seeking to formulate an agreement that satisfies Israel and achieves its strategic interests, even though most of the formulas proposed since the beginning of the year have been based primarily on the positions of the Israeli extreme right.
Hawash explains that Netanyahu is discussing internally with his coalition partners, such as Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, about formulas that will satisfy them. He then hands the documents over to Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer, who then forwards them to US envoy Steve Witkoff, where they are reworked with some formal adjustments to make them more acceptable to the Palestinians before the US administration adopts them as a compromise.
However, according to Hawash, this "compromise" is essentially a purely Israeli idea aimed at entrenching the policies of Netanyahu's government and the orientations of his right-wing partners.

Protecting Israel's security is an absolute American commitment.

Hawash explains that US President Donald Trump aspires to an agreement that ends the fighting, limits Iran's influence, and strengthens relations with the Gulf states. These interests Washington considers far greater than simply protecting Israel, even though protecting Israel's security will remain an absolute US commitment, with the US covering up to 70% of Israel's national security funding.
Hawash stresses that Israel is entirely dependent on this American support, which enables it to continue its large-scale military operations.
Hawash explains that Netanyahu's claims about changing the equations in the Middle East would not have happened without absolute American cover.
Hawash asserts that when Trump recently visited the region, he listened to clear Arab demands for an end to the war and a reorientation of US policy in the Middle East toward de-escalating conflicts. However, Washington is not expected to fully respond to these demands, nor will it fully comply with Israel's extremist conditions.
Hawash points out that one of the most prominent current points of contention concerns Israel's desire to maintain its presence south of the Morag axis, under the pretext of creating what it claims is a "humanitarian zone" to confine Palestinians and separate them from the resistance under the guise of military control. This is an additional tool of pressure on Hamas to push it to make greater concessions, rather than an actual retreat on the part of Washington or Israel.

America is the one running the negotiating scene

Hawash explains that the United States is the one directing the entire negotiating landscape in Gaza, while Israel plays the role of executing the "dirty" security and political tasks on behalf of the West.
Hawash points out that Netanyahu is using stalling tactics in negotiations to impose conditions that will enable him to claim complete victory over the Palestinians. This allows him to perpetuate the denial of a Palestinian state and leave Gaza in a state of chaos under the control of the Israeli military, while removing both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority from its administration.
Hawash asserts that Hamas has shown remarkable flexibility in accepting a temporary truce of up to 60 days, allowing for a halt to the daily war of extermination and giving Palestinians a chance to regroup and restore life to Gaza through relief efforts and Arab and Islamic support.
Hawash explains that Netanyahu is maneuvering to achieve personal, party, and governmental gains, but he may face greater pressure than he can bear now, especially if Washington continues to pursue its greater interests in the region, regardless of his domestic agenda.

Preventing legal action against Israel

Writer and political researcher Dr. Aqel Salah asserts that US President Donald Trump is giving Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sufficient time to continue the war in Gaza by deluding the international community into believing serious negotiations are underway. This is intended to cool the domestic American situation and ease international pressure, fearing legal action against Israel and its leadership.
Salah explains that Netanyahu is attempting, through these formal negotiations, to present to the world a false image—one that he is leading negotiations that are achieving progress. His real goal, he says, is to buy time and drag himself from one round to the next, avoiding any international legal or diplomatic action that might impose restrictions or sanctions on his government.
Salah points out that history is repeating itself today, as happened at the second Camp David summit in 2000, when US President Bill Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and the late Palestinian President Yasser Arafat were present. The United States played the role of absolute supporter of Israel and exerted tremendous pressure on the Palestinians, leading to the dramatic failure of those negotiations and conspiring against the core Palestinian issues that had been postponed since the signing of the Oslo Accords.
Salah explains that the same scenario is currently being repeated through intense American pressure on mediators and Hamas to force it to make concessions. He emphasizes that Israel and Trump are seeking to obtain a surrender agreement from the resistance on full American-Israeli terms.

Trump's statements are false promises for foreign consumption.

Salah considers Trump's media statements to be nothing more than false promises for foreign consumption, while the real negotiations are taking place behind closed doors for Israel's benefit.
Salah points out that the agreement signed on January 19 of this year was sponsored by the previous US administration, led by President Joe Biden and Trump. However, Trump gave Netanyahu the green light to launch a coup against him last March, allowing the bombing of Gaza, the killing, genocide, and the war of starvation and thirst to continue, all with a clear American green light.
Salah notes that the United States and Israel are seeking to force the Palestinian resistance to raise the white flag and sign an agreement on the terms of Netanyahu and Trump. He argues that the Trump administration has stood politically, militarily, and diplomatically with Israel on numerous issues, from Lebanon and Syria to Iran, and is working to completely liquidate the Palestinian cause.
Salah emphasizes that talk of disagreements between Trump and Netanyahu is nothing more than a media ploy to mislead the world into believing there are differences, emphasizing that the relationship between the two sides is complementary, with a clear division of roles to serve Israeli goals.
Salah explains that this relationship became evident prior to the Iran-Israel war, when the media promoted alleged disagreements while there was complete harmony, resulting in an Israeli strike against Iran with American-Israeli support and planning, led by Trump and Netanyahu.
Salah asserts that an agreement with Israel under American and Israeli conditions remains out of reach, because these conditions would imply a complete surrender by the Palestinian resistance, something the resistance will never accept, no matter how intense the pressure.


Exploiting time to implement plans in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

For his part, writer, political researcher, and international relations expert Noman Abed believes that the rounds of negotiations held by Israel under Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership, both in the past and currently, have been nothing more than systematic attempts to exploit time and implement well-thought-out plans encompassing the West Bank and Gaza Strip, while also alleviating the international pressures that have escalated with the continuation of what he describes as genocide against the Palestinians.
Abed explains that the suggestion of serious negotiations has helped mitigate the international shift in the West's perception of Israel, which was previously presented as a "democratic oasis" before being transformed into a state accused of genocide in international courts and a perpetrator of the most heinous massacres and attacks both inside and outside Palestine.
Abed points out that the plan put forward by the Netanyahu government since its formation, as well as after October 7, 2023, is proceeding steadily on the ground with the full backing and support of US administrations, particularly the administration of US President Donald Trump.
Abed explains that Trump's victory and his administration's particular ideological orientation toward Israel, which preceded his election a few months ago, have altered many of America's foreign policy assumptions. A large portion of this administration has maintained ideological and doctrinal ties with the occupying state, a fact reflected in the statements of some of its officials, who have surpassed in their extremism even well-known Israeli figures such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir.

The Trump administration views Israel as a strategic proxy.

Abed explains that Netanyahu's repeated visits to Washington, the most recent of which came after the 12-day war with Iran, contributed to a shift in US strategy toward the Middle East. The principle of non-direct military intervention, which Trump had promoted during his election campaign, declined after the US administration directly intervened in the conflict with Iran. US promises regarding ending conflicts and achieving peace also shifted to a conviction that ending conflicts must first be achieved by achieving Israeli goals.
Abed asserts that the Trump administration now views Israel as a strategic agent implementing its policies in the Middle East, freeing up the administration to address other challenges in Asia and Europe, such as the escalation with China and the Russia-Ukraine war.
Abed explains that this identification between Trump and Netanyahu has led US President Trump to abandon his campaign promises regarding military non-intervention and human rights when it comes to Israel.
Abed asserts that what happened in Washington was nothing more than an agreement on how Israel would play its required role in the region, redrawing the map of the Middle East in accordance with the American-Israeli vision, even if this contradicted Trump's previous promises to end conflicts peacefully or address humanitarian concerns in Gaza.