[Order Michael Finch’s new book, A Time to Stand: HERE. Prof. Jason Hill calls it “an aesthetic and political tour de force.”]

Trump has denied actually saying what he was quoted as saying in an Axios report. “Scoop — Trump to Netanyahu on Gaza talks: “You’re always so f***ing negative”, by Barak Ravid and Marc Caputo, Axios, October 5, 2025:

When Hamas came back with a “yes, but” to President Trump’s Gaza peace proposal on Friday, Trump called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss what he saw as good news.

• Netanyahu felt differently. “Bibi told Trump this is nothing to celebrate, and that it doesn’t mean anything,” a U.S. official with knowledge of the call told Axios.
• Trump fired back: “I don’t know why you’re always so f***ing negative. This is a win. Take it.”

Why it matters: The exchange, which a second U.S. official confirmed, reflects how determined Trump is to push through Netanyahu’s reservations, and convince him to end the war if Hamas will make a deal…

Trump has denied telling Netanyahu “to not be ‘f*cking negative’ and take the win,” further stating: “No, it’s not true. He’s been very positive on the deal.”

A pressing question remains: who were the two officials who corroborated the story in the first place? Either Axios’ reporters lied or both of these officials invented the story, in what would appear to be (at worst) an attempt to drive a wedge between Trump and Netanyahu, thus undermining both. Whatever is at the root, the original Axios story joins the ever-growing pile of fake news.

Perhaps the biggest consideration about the deal is who it benefits most in the long term: Palestinian interests, Israeli interests or Trump’s interests? Trump hopes it’s a deal that will bring peace in a “credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.”

The anti-Trump, anti-Israel New York Times has accused Trump of “strong-arming” Netanyahu into embracing Trump’s Gaza peace deal as a personal win. Although the New York Times is capitalizing on divisions between Trump and Netanyahu, there is an element of truth to its claim. Consider Netanyahu’s words in mid-August (courtesy Israel Government Press Office):

Those who are calling for an end to the war today without defeating Hamas, are not only hardening Hamas’s stance and pushing off the release of our hostages, they are also ensuring that the horrors of the October 7 will recur again and again, and that our sons and daughters will need to fight again and again in an endless war. Therefore, both to advance the release of our hostages and to ensure that Gaza will never again constitute a threat to Israel, we must complete the work and defeat Hamas.

Netanyahu issued this statement in the face of fierce global repudiation of Israel as it was being inaccurately and unfairly blamed for the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. Hamas deserves all the blame, as it used Palestinians as human shields. Compounding the problem is the left’s woeful ignorance about Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the jihad as a whole, as well as its paramount role in Middle East history and world history. Acknowledgement of that history and of the continuing determination to annihilate Israel from the River to the Sea also escapes the left. Yet the left is a lost cause when it comes to any comprehension of the most basic facts about Islam and how the Palestinian cause is central to the Muslim ummah, as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has declared it, and as is even carried on the United Nations website. The “Islamophobia” subterfuge is firmly embedded in the leftist psyche.

The leftist alliance with Islam has grown more apparent since October 7, as has its Marxist leanings, but aside from being anti-Israel and anti-Trump, there is another factor that made the original Axios report somewhat believable when it emerged. Just over a week ago, Netanyahu apologized for Israel’s justified attack in Doha. Such an apology would have amounted to suicide for Israel, given the very character of the battle Israel faces against the global jihad, unless it came with Trump’s prompting and with his support. So it’s obvious that the White House facilitated what amounted to a humiliation of Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister not only “expressed regret about the strikes,” but said “specifically, ‘that, in targeting Hamas leadership during hostage negotiations, Israel violated Qatari sovereignty.’” Netanyahu affirmed that Israel would not conduct such an attack again in the future.” The left-leaning Haaretz subsequently published an article entitled: How Trump Humiliated Netanyahu, Rewarded Qatar and Quashed the Messianic Right’s Fantasies. NDTV reported: Trump Holds Phone As Netanyahu Dials Qatar To Apologise For Attack, and the Atlantic wrote: “Trump Is Successfully Bullying Netanyahu.”

Trump’s Gaza peace plan has raised the hopes of many, but it does not take into consideration the nature of the jihad as instructed by the Sharia.

As a whole, there is a fundamental difference in how Westerners may view Middle East politics, as compared with those who are actually from the Middle East, such as Netanyahu, who fully grasp what the jihad is about. Although Netanyahu has embraced Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan, Netanyahu has far more experience in understanding the jihad, and thus is likely going along to get along given Trump’s pressure, amid a relentless global gang-up.

American and other Western politicians have a short-sighted view regarding problems in the Middle East. Their own vantage point is from one election to the next. In America, the view is in four-year terms. That’s the time an American president has to try to solve the grave problems that present themselves in the Middle East, regardless of the fact that creating these problems was a 1,400 year history of bloody Islamic conquest, and the jihadis who today are continuing along the same path.

Sharia-adherent Muslims have longterm patience. By contrast, Western culture seeks instant solutions. A glimpse into that patient mindset came from  9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:

“Jihadi-minded brothers would immigrate into the United States” and “wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws” until they were strong enough to rise up and attack us. “He said the brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks and the American people would eventually become so tired, so frightened, and so weary of war that they would just want it to end.”

Many in the West are already worn out by Islam and by the Israel-Gaza war, but jihadists are on a long-term mission of conquest. All Sharia-adherent Muslims regard the Sharia as being divine and above all man-made laws. Sharia supremacists do not negotiate with infidels in honesty, so whatever is agreed to in the Trump peace plan will not lead to lasting peace. Peace for jihadists only comes when full conquest is achieved, either by using stealth means, violent, or by employing a combination of both. Islamic states who fund the Muslim Brotherhood are an example of the latter. 

“War is deceit,” in the words of Muhammad (Sunan Abī Dāwūd 2637), and “Allah is the best of deceivers” (Qur’an 3:54). So making an honest deal with infidels would be in violation of Muhammad’s instruction.

Muslim Brotherhood forces were active in the region before Israel’s founding, and obviously continue to this day. Their jihad escalated on October 7, 2023. The Muslim Brotherhood had immense influence in the Arab revolt during 1936-1939; it raised money and helped organize a “resistance” against Jewish settlement in the land of Jewish ancestry.

Netanyahu is hard-pressed to accept a deal that would see the release of the hostages, alive and dead, who “will be exchanged for 250 Palestinians prisoners serving life sentences.” These prisoners are deemed heroes and will go back to killing more Israelis.

Here is a video of Netanyahu at the young age of 28. He already fully understood and explained the reason why there was no peace in the Middle East, and the error of assuming that a “two-state solution” would bring peace:

The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood offshoot Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement) is to obliterate Israel, and state actors including ostensible US allies Turkey and Qatar fully support this. The goal is the same for all jihadist entities in the region, including the Palestinian Authority, which invited Hamas to “unite with us.” Hamas’ ally, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), has also called for an urgent meeting to devise a “unified Palestinian stance” on Trump’s Gaza plan.

As great a leader as Trump is for Israel (imagine if Kamala Harris had won!), and for America (in putting its interests first, which every responsible leader should be doing for his or her country), overall, the jihad is not being approached with the kind of realism that Netanyahu has seen, experienced and understands. But Netanyahu cannot feasibly oppose Trump.

In a best-case scenario, perhaps there may be some reprieve  if the hostages are returned, and if Hamas and the Palestinian Authority are driven out of Gaza. But then, the next issues to contend with will emerge: every country of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation seeks a two-state solution, with Israel pushed back to pre-1967 borders (a.k.a. the Auschwitz borders), and with East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital. Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood is still active in the region and throughout the West; Syria — under the rule of the hardcore jihadist Ahmed Al-Sharaa — shares a border with Israel; terror-funding states such as Turkey (which has been dubbed the “new Iran“) are being armed by the West; Iran and Turkey are discussing military cooperation (while Turkey appears to the world to be sanctioning Iran); Turkey is signaling its intent to build a stronger regional security partnership with Iran; and the region is crawling with myriad jihad groups. The list goes on.

Trump may have a temporary plan that jihadists will invariably exploit to buy more time for their mission to destroy Israel. Time is of no essence to jihadists. The goal is in the long term. Israel will again be faced with the same jihad problem that has plagued it since its founding. Israel is a sovereign nation, led by Netanyahu, whom its people elected. It now finds itself confronted by the larger looming question: what happens in the region when Trump’s term is up?