|
Israeli forces began pulling back from parts of Gaza on Friday, allowing some Palestinians to return to what is left of their neighborhoods. After two years of a devastatingly brutal war, the pause in fighting has been a rare cause for celebration in the Gaza Strip. Relief, too, will hopefully soon come to those in Israel waiting for the return of the remaining hostages taken on Oct. 7, 2023.
The ceasefire deal agreed by Hamas and Israel has raised hope of a permanent end to the conflict. But yet to come are negotiations over far thornier issues, not least the proposed total disarmament of Hamas and the question of who will run a post-war Gaza.
Under the U.S.-backed 20-point plan that form the basis of current negotiations, the proposal is for an interim technocratic Palestinian body to govern the territory overseen by a “Board of Peace” run by U.S. President Donald Trump with the assistance of former U.K. prime minister, Tony Blair. That proposed arrangement has Dana El Kurd, an expert on international relations and Palestinian politics, worried. She argues that what is being proposed is an “illiberal peace” – one that is asymmetrical, imposed in an authoritarian way, and that denies Palestinians proper representation or public buy-in.
Still, many – if not the Nobel Peace Prize committee – are lauding Trump for getting even a flawed proposal on the table. Political scientist Asaf Siniver explains that the U.S. president did so by employing an old established tactic: Dead cat diplomacy.
The premise is simple. By publicly naming and shaming those deemed responsible for any failure in negotiations – dumping the metaphorical deceased kitty on their doorstep – then you can force an intransigent party into concessions. In this instance, the leaking of choice words delivered by Trump to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and public posts framing Hamas as the main obstacle to peace may have had the desired effect.
“What is clear is that Trump’s willingness to weaponize public humiliation and blame has, at least for now, jolted two entrenched adversaries closer to compromise than years of cautious mediation ever did,‘ writes Siniver.
|
