THE leftie, activist, progressive community are not generally known for their good manners, especially if they’re demonstrating in favour of Palestine. Or indeed against racism or President Trump. It’s too much to expect them to eat a large portion of humble pie, but that’s what they all should do if the Trump deal brings peace to Gaza. It is an ‘if’, not a ‘when’, but those who agree to sign will be taking the least bad option.
The choice facing Hamas, its proxies and supporters is simple: sign or die. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have achieved what was thought impossible in military circles. They are utterly destroying a terror group and its infrastructure in a city full of civilians.
Those who shout genocide should consider the facts. In 2023 the population of Gaza was some 2.2million. According to the UN (which gets its data from the Hamas-controlled ‘Gaza authorities’), 65,400 people have been killed and 167,160 have been injured. Therefore some two million Palestinians haven’t been killed or harmed. Why? Because the Israelis don’t intend to harm them.
Those killed include Hamas fighters, who are legitimate targets. Estimates vary as to how many have been killed. In 2024 Israel claimed to have killed some 17,000 Hamas fighters, of whom it can identify about half. That implies that for every Hamas fighter the IDF have also killed 2.8 civilians. For comparison, in the Iraq War logs released to Wikileaks the records state 23,984 enemy deaths and 66,081 civilian deaths, pretty much the same ratio. No one accused the Coalition forces of genocide.
The simple, uncomfortable truth is that fighting wars in civilian-occupied areas kills civilians and destroys infrastructure. The military term for this ‘collateral damage’, which is cold and dispassionate – but then that’s what combat soldiers must be. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry’s recent report has got it wrong – there is no genocide in Gaza. No intent, no extermination camps, no ovens, no machete-wielding gangs, just unavoidable collateral damage.
For the Israelis the deal achieves their oft-stated war aims (the return of hostages and the destruction of Hamas) while removing the necessity of the IDF fighting through the rest of Gaza City, with the concomitant battle casualties. It also opens a path to long-term security in Gaza, with the prospect of investment giving Gazans more useful work than tunnelling under the strip to kill Jews. It recognises that a Palestinian state is a legitimate aspiration of the Palestinian people, an anathema to some in Netanyahu’s government and, of course, it does nothing about Israel’s other Palestinian problem, the West Bank, which it doesn’t mention.
Whether the tawdry politics of the Knesset will block the deal is moot and it could get messy. The ultra-orthodox (who don’t have to serve in the IDF) have previously not accepted compromises with Palestinians. If they seek to scupper this deal, putting other Israeli families in danger but not their own, expect fireworks. Like all deals, the Trump plan is not perfect but it’s good enough. Israelis are rational and will, I think, accept it. The consequences of Israel falling out with the United States would be very serious militarily, economically and politically.
Provided the relevant Arab nations sign up this is the best opportunity for a lasting peace in my lifetime. Palestinian leaders, who tend not to have troubled themselves with elections or have any particular regard for the long-term interests of the Palestinian people, have rejected at least five peace deals in the past 60 years. It would be rash to be optimistic, but if they decline this opportunity the United States is likely to wash their hands of their cause. No other country or organisation has the heft and influence to deliver, as 50-plus years of conflict have demonstrated.
Once signed much will hinge on rapidly building trust between the Palestinians (not Hamas, as they will have gone) and the International Security Force (ISF) and between the ISF and the IDF, which is to happen under the direction of a technocratic agency whose board is run by President Trump and comprises Sir Tony Blair and other world leaders.
The explicit inclusion of Blair is a bit of a surprise. True, after he left Downing Street in 2007 he immediately (literally that day) became the Special Envoy to the Middle East of the Madrid Quartet, a position he held for eight years. The ‘Quartet’ comprised the EU, the United States, Russia (Putin was a good guy back then) and the United Nations. It was set up to develop a peace process after the Second Intifada and lead a way to a lasting two-state solution. It hasn’t made much progress.
Beyond Blair’s time at the quartet, seen by some Palestinians as biased towards Israel, he was instrumental in starting the invasion of Iraq on the basis of the notorious dodgy dossier. Given this, some of the Arab press see his bizarre inclusion as unhelpful. Quite why and how Blair is involved is a mystery to many (less so perhaps if they check out the Larry Ellison connection). Someone has to do it and clearly President Trump has many other calls on his time. To most of the protagonists Blair is a known quantity. If he is a flawed one at least they know his faults. President Trump should beware of Blair’s ability to take the credit for other people’s efforts, particularly if there’s a Nobel Prize in the offing.
