John Mull (9:51)
All right, first up, let's start with what the left is saying. The left is glad the two sides reached a deal and primarily credits Biden. But many say the president's handling of the conflict deserves scrutiny too. Some suggest Trump made the deal happen, given his unique political leverage. In the foreword, Emily Tamkin said, this hostage deal is Biden's victory, but it's also Biden's shame. President Joe Biden's administration has secured a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, and President elect Donald Trump is taking much of the credit. The parallel that immediately jumps to mind is that of President Jimmy Carter, whose work to resolve the Iran hostage crisis only paid dividends after his successor had been sworn into office, Tamkin wrote. Like Biden, Carter spent his last year in office as a one term president consumed with negotiations over trying to get hostages released. But as tempting as it is to see history rhyming, a crisis in the Middle east, inflation, a president finally achieving a deal only on his way out the door, there's an important difference. Namely, Israel is not Iran, where Carter was exclusively negotiating with an enemy country. One of the two countries with whom Biden was negotiating was Israel, an American ally. And although the Biden administration repeatedly placed primary blame on Hamas for scuttling ceasefire efforts. We know that, for example, ceasefire negotiations this summer were reportedly complicated by conditions that Netanyahu added in, tamkin said. It is perhaps too early to make sweeping assessments about what this deal shows us. But one question we can ask now is whether Biden privileged preserving U S Israel friendship even as his own relationship with Netanyahu reportedly deteriorated over reaching a deal. In the Atlantic, Yair Rosenberg wrote, Trump made the Gaza deal happen. The terms largely echo a proposal laid out by Biden himself in May 2024. But the incoming president dragged the parties over the finish line. What changed was not Washington's general orientation toward the conflict. Far from turning up the heat on Israel, Trump telegraphed a further embrace of its positions during his 2024 campaign Rosenberg wrote. Hamas could reasonably surmise that it would not get a better deal during a Trump presidency, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hard right government likely acceded to the arrangement in order to stay in the new leader's good graces as he assumes office. Put another way, it's not that Trump had a stick with which to beat Israel that Biden didn't have. It's that his presidency holds out the prospect of carrots that Biden would never offer. Rosenberg said it was less the president elect's pressure than his potential promise that brought the Israeli far right onside. With Trump, everything is a transaction and for his would be suitors, not just Israel, but also Hamas sponsors in Qatar, the Gaza ceasefire is a down payment. Alright, that is it for what the left is saying. Which brings us to what the right is saying. Many on the right argue that there are few winners in this conflict, but Trump clearly made the deal happen. Some say Israel faces an uncertain future and an unpredictable American ally under Trump. In Reason, Matthew Petty said nobody won the war in Gaza. President Joe Biden tacitly endorsed a de escalation through escalation strategy, flooded Israel with weapons at US taxpayer expense, and even deployed US troops onto Israeli soil. In November 2024, the Hamas negotiating team was kicked out of Qatar, reportedly because of the Biden administration's pressure. Thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians were killed, Petty wrote. Hamas will rule over a traumatized population living in bombed out wreckage. The dead have not been properly counted. The official death toll of 46,600 may have missed 40% of violent deaths, and that doesn't include deaths from starvation and disease. Iran, which had given Hamas vague assurances of support in a war with Israel, was caught by surprise in October 2023 and turned out to be unprepared for the confrontation that followed. Petty added Iranian losses, however, are not necessarily America's gains. The United States now has more responsibilities in a Middle east that is more chaotic and violent than before. The only winner so far is Trump. Discontent over Biden's war helped swing the election to Trump, and a ceasefire on the eve of inauguration is best of both worlds for the Trump administration. In the New York Times, Bret Stephens suggested the Israeli right may soon be disenchanted with Trump. Thanks largely to Trump, a deal demanded by the Israeli left and reviled by the right is about to come into effect. A year's worth of diplomacy by the Biden administration is finally about to bear fruit on account of its political nemesis, the far right. Parties that were part of Netanyahu's coalition may bolt the government, Stephen said. In the hostage deal, the price for Israel will be in many ways heavy. For every Israeli hostage released by Hamas, Israel will release several fold Palestinian prisoners, many of them with Israeli blood on their hands. This doesn't mean the deal is a bad one for Israel's national interest. A more difficult quandary for the Israeli right is what else Trump may want them to accept. The president elect clearly wants an Israeli Saudi normalization agreement as a capstone to the Abraham Accords he oversaw in 2020. For that to happen, the Saudis will demand a roadmap for a Palestinian state. Trump may also prefer to use Iran's current weakness to negotiate a second nuclear deal. Stephen Thruitt Donald Trump may have the soul of a bully, but he also has the instincts of a deal maker and a yearning for acclaim, including the Nobel Peace Prize he thinks he was denied for the Abraham Accords. Whatever else his next four years in power will bring, he it won't conform to ideological type. Alright, that is it for what the left and the right are saying. Which brings us to what some Israeli and Palestinian writers are saying. Israeli writers celebrate the hostages potential return, but worry that some terms of the deal will embolden Hamas. Palestinian writers express relief at the prospect of an end to the fighting in Gaza, but say it is little consolation after the last 15 months. In the New York Post, Leo Leibowitz wrote praise that the Israeli hostages are coming home, but a deal that keeps Hamas in power is a bad one. The ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas is meant to be a first step and we don't know what happens next or the promises that were made behind the scenes. Most importantly, the idea of dozens of Israelis, including toddlers, returning home after more than a year in purgatory is enough to dull even the most hawkish observers concerns, leibowitz said. Yet it is very hard to observe this deal and see it as anything other than an utter and complete disgrace and an embarrassment for America. First and most devastating, Hamas remains in power, greatly weakened, true, and hampered by increased Israeli military presence in Gaza, but able to claim ultimate victory. Why would Trump, who repeatedly said there would be hell to pay if the hostages weren't released before he takes office, put his weight behind a deal that, with very few and very minor details, is the exact same one peddled unsuccessfully for many months now by the Biden administration, leibowitz wrote. The unspeakable horrors of October 7, 2023 ought to have inspired a new and bold rethinking of American policy in the region, one that no longer tolerates terrorists or their handlers. Instead, we're getting another deal that telegraphs a lack of resolve and rewards the terrorists for their heinous crimes. In Al Jazeera, Afaf al Najjar described a fragile claim amid unending struggle. As a Palestinian receiving this news feels like standing in the eye of the storm, in a moment of ghostly calm, surrounded by chaos and destruction. For me, at least, it marks the end to the bloodshed. But the fact is, the ones we lost will never return, and these scars will never heal. How would a ceasefire ever change that fact? Al Najjar wrote. Ceasefires are often hailed as victories for diplomacy, but to me they are more like pauses in a constant nightmare. This latest agreement is a reminder that for the people of Gaza, survival often hinges on the fragility of politics. Children, mothers and fathers carry the unbearable weight of uncertainty. I find myself asking, is this truly a step toward peace or just another chapter in a story of delayed justice and extended suffering? The ceasefire's terms, reached under immense international pressure, include a halt to airstrikes and rocket fire, along with provisions to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza. These measures are desperately needed, but their necessity is also an accusation of the international community's failure to act sooner to prevent the crises that make such measures critical, al Najjar wrote, temporary peace cannot replace the right to live freely and to dream beyond survival. This prompts another critical question. Will Palestinians ever get their rights to have full control over their political and diplomatic path to justice, or will they always be eliminated from the political stage and portrayed to fit in the victim's role? Alright, let's head over to Isaac for his take.
