I think you are reading this backwards. I was sarcastically agreeing with him that Hamas was unmatched and that no military force in the world could accomplish what Hamas accomplished.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/01/16/trump-gaza-ceasefire/ Trump’s ‘madman theory’ worked in Gaza when all else failed U.S. foreign policy establishment could use more unpredictable and disruptive forces. Shadi Hamid 33 minutes ago Donald Trump might seem like a madman. But it turns out that that might be a good thing — at least for the moment. A Gaza ceasefire dealthat was elusive for over a year under President Joe Biden became real after the interventions of a Trump administration that doesn’t even exist yet. (It is easy to forget, but Biden is still president for a few more days). The details of how it happened are telling. Trump’s incoming special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s aides that he would be in Israel Saturday afternoon. This was in the middle of Sabbath, so the aides suggested an evening meeting instead. Witkoff’s reply was reportedly “salty.” He wasn’t interested in an evening meeting. As one Israeli diplomat put it, “Witkoff isn’t a diplomat. … He’s a businessman who wants to reach a deal quickly and charges ahead unusually aggressively.” For months, Trump had said he expected an end to hostilities between Israel and Hamas and a release of the remaining hostages by the time he took office — or else “all hell would break out.” Trump didn’t specify what such hell would entail. But the message was, apparently, as clear as it needed to be. How — or whether — the various interlocking phases of the deal will be implemented remains to be seen. But an early victory, even one that might not last, still marks considerable progress over what came before, which was mostly a series of false starts. As one diplomat briefed on the negotiations noted, Trump’s recent push marked “the first time there has been real pressure on the Israeli side to accept a deal.” And therein lies the difference. Biden was unwilling — and perhaps at times simply unable — to put any real pressure on Israel to accept a ceasefire. Repeatedly, Biden presented red lines to Israel. Israel ignored them. There were no consequences. As outgoing Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during aNew York Times interview, their theory of the case was that any perception of “daylight” between the United States and Israel would be counterproductive. Or as Biden himself once chillingly said, “We’re not going to do a damn thing other than protect Israel.” While many of Trump’s announced appointees are hard-line Israel supporters, Trump himself doesn’t seem to care about treating Israel with kid gloves. He wanted a deal. Biden never wanted one enough. Who would have thought? When you put pressure on allies dependent on America for billions of dollars of military aid for their survival, you actually get results. This brings us to one of the paradoxes of a Trump presidency. Trump is, in fact, emotionally volatile and dangerous. But being perceived worked better with U.S. allies than adversaries.” This gets at something important. For decades, there’s been a bipartisan consensus that alliances should be strengthened and that allies should always receive preferential treatment. But alliances are, or at least should be, a means to other ends. If allies are threatening American interests or American values — as Israel has flagrantly done over the past year — then they must be challenged and threatened with consequences if they don’t alter their behavior. Much of the academic research on the “madman theory” has been skeptical of its utility. President Richard M. Nixon applied the approach in 1969, flying nuclear-armed bombers back and forth toward the Soviet Union to convince them he was willing to risk nuclear war to end the conflict in Vietnam. But it didn’t work because Soviet leaders understood, correctly, that Nixon was bluffing. He wasn’t actually that crazy. In a 2023study utilizing a series of novel survey experiments, the political scientist Joshua Schwartz concludes that “being perceived as mad — in any form — does provide a universal bargaining advantage: It makes seemingly incredible threats more credible.” But the catch is that “actually being perceived as somewhat mad — unlike Nixon — is a prerequisite for the Madman Strategy to be successful.” A study on the psychology of negotiations found that “emotional inconsistency induced recipients to make greater concessions compared to expressing a consistent emotion.” Whatever else you think about Trump, he’s the closest thing the United States has had to a genuinely erratic, emotionally unstable president. Even critics of madman theory like Daniel Drezner acknowledge that during Trump’s first term his “madman schtick worked better with U.S. allies than adversaries.” This gets at something important. For decades, there’s been a bipartisan consensus that alliances should be strengthened and that allies should receive preferential treatment. But alliances are, or at least should be, a means to other ends. If allies are threatening American interests or American values — as Israel has flagrantly done over the past year — then they must be challenged and threatened with consequences if they don’t alter their behavior. The Biden administration, by contrast, saw the strengthening of alliances as its own end, without asking whether these alliances “left Americans safer and more prosperous,” as former Bernie Sanders foreign policy adviser Matt Duss recently noted. Democrats have often presented themselves as the smart, competent stewards of foreign policy, yet intelligence, predictability and competence can take you only so far if your assumptions are fundamentally faulty. That’s why in David Halberstam’s 1972 book,“The Best and The Brightest,” about the Kennedy and Johnson administrations’ failures in Vietnam, he meant the term ironically. They believed they were right, and they may have been brilliant — but this led them to stubbornly resist alternative assessments and double down on misguided policies. Over the past couple decades, U.S. policy toward Israel has been predictable. Democrats and Republicans have insisted on following one failure with another, with little to show for it, indulging a close ally with almost unlimited tolerance for its destructive behavior. Of course, Donald Trump, after claiming victory for the ceasefire, may very well lose interest and return to policies that embolden Israel to act with impunity. It’s early days yet. But a certain kind of recklessness — and, yes, even madness — may be the disruptive force needed to reshape our assumptions of how and when to pressure recalcitrant allies like Israel. While Trump’s erratic nature poses risks to global stability, it may also be the only thing capable of shocking a foreign policy establishment that has grown too comfortable with its own failures. The irony is that sometimes it takes a madman to make the sane choice. Shadi Hamid is a Post columnist. He is also a research professor of Islamic studies at Fuller Seminary and the author of several books, including "The Problem of Democracy" and "Islamic Exceptionalism."follow on X@shadihamid
It just got better, be optimistic Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Russian President Vladimir Putin have signed a cooperation pact, deepening the partnership between two of the world’s most heavily sanctioned nations. Iranian and Russian officials said the “comprehensive strategic partnership treaty” covers areas from trade and military cooperation to science, culture and education. Jan17
That’s a lot of words to try and avoid the fact that Netanyahu waited till after the election to come to the table because he is a close ally of Trump and he needed to prolong the war as long as possible to stay in power and avoid accountability for his criminal charges. This isn’t all that dissimilar to Jimmy Carter getting screwed over by the Republicans and Reagan who cut a back room deal to wait till the election, and surprise surprise the hostages were released I believe on Reagan’s Inauguration Day. Carter and Biden are similar in that they were admittedly weak here in not going public and lambasting their opponent for interfering. Trump would have made that the central focus of his campaign if the roles were reversed. Either way Trump isn’t some genius deal maker. He’s corrupt and at least in this case his ally worked against the interest of peace and the hostages safety in order to pursue Trumps and Netanyahu’s political interests.
The slightest pressure from the US made Israel agree to the cease fire deal from May. Wow. Who could have possibly foreseen that? No one. Absolutely no one. This is the most shocking thing ever. Ever. We were assured that the current admin was working night and day for a resolution. Yet one visit from some dbag Trump businessman to basically repeat Clinton's "who's the ****ing superpower here?" to Bibi and suddenly Israel finally agreed to the deal they were supposed to agree to 8 months ago. Biden woke up every day for the last ~250 days with the ability to stop the massacre over there but chose not to. His legacy will be one of empowering genocide and ushering in a Trump popular vote victory. Great job, Joe. Great job. That said, I'm sure it won't be all roses going forward. I expect annexation of the West Bank, and maybe more. Mariam Adelson didn't donate all that money for nothing. But it's a step in the right direction and it was great to see all those Palestinians celebrating.
The immediate relief Palestinians will have in Gaza is definitely needed but ya I really fear what happens to the Palestinian people once the dust settles. Any miniscule amount of autonomy they had is going out the window. The rapid pace in which this ceasefire was achieved just because of the incoming admin shows how the Biden admin lied through their teeth about how they are working "night and day". They are bullshitters. Anthony Bliken deserves to harassed and feel fear every time he goes out to a restaurant.
