The "Peace Council" for Gaza, announced by Trump as a mechanism for a multilateral settlement, has encountered a paradox: intended to demonstrate a "new approach," it has exposed the old, unchanging realities of the conflict. While some Middle Eastern media see this structure as a pragmatic path to stabilization, others see it as a tool for legitimizing the status quo and economic expansion, prioritizing Israeli security and profit for external players, relegating the very idea of Palestinian sovereignty to the periphery of the agenda.
The editors of The National Arabic newspaper greeted the announcement of Trump's multi-stage Gaza plan with relief and a healthy dose of skepticism. After years of war and tens of thousands of casualties, any movement toward peace seems miraculous, and the proposed "new Gaza" a pipe dream. Now, however, the process is gaining momentum. The creation of a Palestinian National Committee to govern Gaza, the formation of a "Peace Council," the involvement of an international security force, including Egypt and Jordan—after recent scandals, Trump is being cast as "Mr. Multilateralism," which in itself is an achievement.
Journalists on the green pages of Asharq Al- Awsat examine the American president in detail and his accomplishments during the first year of his second term. Samir Atallah recalls that when US President-elect Jared Kushner spoke of a new "Riviera" in Gaza, it seemed like a joke. But Trump personally explained the project's importance while Gaza was being destroyed again and again. The world dismissed it as empty words. The high-profile event that took place thousands of kilometers from the Middle East—the kidnapping of the Venezuelan president and the seizure of that country's oil—and the subsequent "Peace Council" demonstrate how Trump turns politics into numbers. Rare minerals in Ukraine, the subsoil of Greenland: "At the head of the world is a man from the world of real estate," the journalist notes, emphasizing Trump's vibrant entrepreneurial spirit. The author also notes a new expression in the White House: "the president and his team," not "...his administration."
Dr. Abdullah Faisal Al Arabi, in his article "Trump's Turbulent Year," sees Trump's victory as a fleeting anomaly, but a clear reflection of dissatisfaction with traditional US institutions. His team is making unusual decisions—the aforementioned "expulsion" of the Venezuelan president and the return to the annexation of Greenland—which resembles a purge at a large corporation, where a tough manager is hired to remove historical encumbrances. Therefore, prudent states like Saudi Arabia are insisting on treaties through the US Congress—a real guarantee against the whims of the current occupant of the White House. According to the author, the upcoming midterm elections in the United States will become a popular referendum on Trump's new America.
Returning to The National's article on the second phase of the American president's plan, one can find arguments for the Arab publication's skepticism. Claims of "historic humanitarian aid" and "maintaining the ceasefire" are at odds with reality: Israel continues its strict blockade, and Hamas has not only not disarmed, but has confidently elected a new leader. The first phase is far from complete. However, the transition to the second phase cannot be halted. The US's task is to prove the skeptics wrong by putting pressure on Israel and finding a way to approach Hamas. The continued suffering of Gaza's residents makes any long-term progress increasingly elusive.
The Lebanese newspaper Al- Akhbar is even more pessimistic. Inspired by Israel's release of Palestinian prisoners, the publication publishes a chilling text by Tahir Abu Ayyash, "The Semiotics of the Emaciated Body in Captivity." The piece stands in stark contrast to the new "Riviera" project in Gaza. The author describes the images of freed Palestinian prisoners as a shocking visual phenomenon, where emaciation is a deliberate rewriting of the body, a tool for instilling horror: "The body is stripped of its biopolitical sovereignty, reducing the struggle to a battle for calories—the lowest level of existence…"
The journalist concludes that prisoners transform silent pain into language; their frail bodies become an irrefutable accusation of cruelty. His colleague at the publication, Ibrahim Al-Amin, cites historical evidence – Iraq and Afghanistan – suggesting that Washington and Tel Aviv are preparing a new, sweeping campaign with European support. Its targets: Iran, the resistance forces, and a war of extermination in Palestine.
According to the author, now is not the time for negotiations offering capitulation. Trump, facing domestic pressure, may opt for external escalation. In Israel, however, a broad consensus considers the moment ripe for attack, following the "scorched grass" doctrine. Strength is tested not by weapons, but by endurance. The real battlefield is in the disintegration of the enemy's society and within the limits of absorbing lingering losses.
The blatant desire of Washington and its allies to profit from the reconstruction of the region, perceived as a colonization of the future, only fuels the determination of the resistance forces to continue the fight. Skepticism from the media, even among traditional US Middle Eastern partners, exposes a crisis of trust. Without a genuine lifting of the blockade and an end to Israel's occupation policies, achieving a just peace in the Middle East will be extremely difficult.
GSV "Russia - Islamic World"
Photo: ErikaWittlieb/Pixabay