As President Donald Trump seeks to end wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, his approach to both seems to boil down to giving the stronger party what it wants and pushing the weaker to accept it.
His defenders view it as hardnosed realpolitik – a recognition that the strong eventually prevail, so better to cut one's losses in the interest of a certain kind of peace. "You don't have the cards right now," Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in their White House blowup.
" He's transactional," said Aaron David Miller, a former veteran U.S. diplomat now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Trump is "looking for quick wins — deals, I would argue — not anything remotely related to the incredibly difficult work" of conflict resolution.
But the eventual outcome of conflicts is not always determined by military power alone – see America’s 20-year war in Afghanistan, where the world's strongest military failed to defeat a tenacious insurgency.
And the mercurial Trump has a way of complicating any unified theory of his actions: In recent days, he has threatened new sanctions against Russia and his administration unnerved some Israelis by negotiating directly with Hamas., which the U.S. and Israel view as a terrorist group.
Peace through strength?
Trump has offered Russian President Vladimir Putin nearly everything he wants before peace negotiations even begin, by ruling out NATO membership for Ukraine, and suspending military aid and intelligence sharing that Ukraine relies on as it fends off Russian attacks.
At the same time, he has pressed Zelenskyy to share Ukraine’s mineral wealth with the U.S. without formal security guarantees in return.
In the Middle East, Trump has lavished support on Israel, restoring military aid that had been paused by the Biden administration and embracing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's goals of returning all the hostages and eradicating Hamas – which could be mutually exclusive. Trump has yet to make clear whether his long-term vision for peace includes a two-state solution -- long a pillar of U.S. policy in the Middle East.
For Hamas, which started the war with its Oct. 7, 2023, attack, Trump has publicly offered only threats and ultimatums. But the administration recently held direct talks with the group rather than going through mediators.
Alon Pinkas, a former senior Israeli diplomat, said Trump's actions suggest he doesn't see Netanyahu as a power player like Putin or Chinese President Xi Jinping, but more as a “local warlord.”
“He's part of my empire. He's not a decisionmaker,” Pinkas said, describing Trump's approach to the Israeli leader.
In both conflicts, the weaker party has remained defiant
Zelenskyy has reached out to Ukraine's European allies, who have pledged to beef up their own defenses, and he has vowed to fight on even as he seeks to repair ties with Washington.
Hamas has dismissed Trump's threats and says dozens of remaining hostages will only be returned in exchange for an end to the war. A fragile truce negotiated by the Biden administration and the Trump team is in limbo, with Israel threatening to resume the fighting.
Diana Buttu, a Palestinian analyst who advised peace negotiators in the 2000s, says Trump's strategy is unlikely to succeed.
Hamas, which has already survived a 15-month Israeli onslaught, "doesn’t give two hoots about him,” she said. “They don’t see that he’s got any leverage over them.”
The strong do as they wish – but not always
The limits of military power have been debated for millennia.
Thucydides’ fifth century B.C. history of the war between Athens and Sparta includes a famous debate over the use of military power known as the Melian Dialogue.
Athens lands a fleet at the island of Melos and makes the city-state an offer it can’t refuse. Join the empire, pay tribute and you won’t be obliterated. The Athenians famously advise the Melians to “try to get what it is possible for you to get,” considering that “the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.”
The Melians refuse, appealing to “fair play and just dealing.” They warn the Athenians that such belligerence could drive other small states into the arms of Sparta. Athens lays siege to Melos, and after months of fighting sacks it, putting the men to death and sending the women and children into slavery.
It's a grim parable — and perhaps a cautionary tale for Canada, Greenland and Panama.
In more recent conflicts, however, military might has only gone so far. Hamas has survived five wars against the most powerful military in the Middle East, the last sparked by a surprise attack that caught Israel's vaunted security agencies unaware.
Ukraine held off the Russian invasion after many thought it would be quickly overrun. The Biden administration had even suggested Zelenskyy flee, an offer he famously declined.
Even in Melos, the outcome was not so clear-cut. Twelve years after Athens seemingly proved that might makes right, it lost the war to Sparta.
A more even-handed approach
The United States’ most successful diplomatic forays have tended to involve a more even-handed approach. It helps if the warring parties are in what political scientists refer to as a mutually hurting stalemate.
Then-President Jimmy Carter secured the landmark Camp David peace agreement after twisting the arms of Israelis and Egyptians alike just five years after they fought the last of several wars.
The Good Friday Agreement that ended decades of violence in northern Ireland came after both Britain and Irish republicans concluded that outright victory was impossible.
Trump's supporters boast that he thinks outside the box in the Middle East, but for decades, the U.S. has built its approach around ironclad support for Israel — and its peace efforts have repeatedly failed.
The Abraham Accords brokered by Trump in his first term — in which Israel forged ties with four Arab countries — sidelined the Palestinians. Hamas said its Oct. 7 attack was partly driven by the sense that the Palestinian cause had been forgotten.
Buttu recalls meeting with American diplomats from previous administrations who told Palestinians essentially the same thing Trump told Zelenskyy.
At a meeting in November 2000 about a major settlement under construction in east Jerusalem, "the Americans turned to us and said, 'There's just no way, you're just going to have to accept defeat and move on... You're going to have to lick your wounds,'" Buttu said.
The peace process collapsed around that time as a Palestinian uprising erupted. Twenty-five years later, the conflict is deadlier than ever and no less intractable.
“They told the Israelis that might is right," Buttu said. "It encourages them to be even mightier.”
___
Follow AP's war coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/israel-hamas-war
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP
Credit: AP