Trump's 'Ceasefire' Plan: More US Soldiers, Less US Guarantees
Mainstream media, like The Independent , is suddenly 'concerned' about the stability of future Gaza peace deals, especially those that might involve US boots on the ground. The piece warns a Trump deal is 'vague on details.' What they omit is how chronically 'vague' these proposed 'peace deals' always are, particularly when it comes to Palestinian rights and the enforcement mechanisms to hold
Israel accountable. This isn't about Trump's vagueness; it's about a consistent, bipartisan US policy that ensures no meaningful accountability for its primary regional ally. For instance, after the Oslo Accords (1993), promises of a Palestinian state evaporated under perpetual Israeli settlement expansion, funded and armed by successive US administrations. Where was the media's 'stability' check
then? The real question isn't 'who will keep the peace,' but rather 'who profits from breaking it?' When politicians like those who benefit from the $22.5 million AIPAC spent in the 2022 election cycle (OpenSecrets.org) consistently vote for unconditional aid, stability for Palestinians is never the objective. The 'experts' quoted by the Independent seem to forget that 'peace' has an inconvenient
history of destabilizing for one side while solidifying control for the other. How many failed 'peace processes' get a free pass before we stop pretending they're anything other than thinly veiled extensions of power politics?