Hosting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the fifth time since returning to the White House 11 months ago, US President Donald Trump gave a performance on Monday that provided a microcosm of his customary disdain for foreign policy protocol.
In an impromptu 15-minute news conference on the steps of Mar-a-Lago, Trump first offered an offhand and vaguely dismissive acknowledgement of the unusual frequency of the Israeli prime minister’s visits by asking journalists: “Do you recognize this guy?”
He then proceeded to cavalierly trample diplomatic convention by saying that he would back Netanyahu “immediately” if he ordered another attack on Iran’s nuclear installations, while confirming that he had asked Israeli President Isaac Herzog to pardon Netanyahu in a bribery and corruption trial — apparently heedless of the appearance of interfering in the affairs of a sovereign state.
More startlingly still, he appeared to accept Russia’s claim that Ukraine had attacked Russian President Vladimir Putin’s residence overnight while acknowledging that he had no independent US intelligence confirmation, preferring to accept the Putin’s word, even as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who Trump hosted the day before, denounced the story as a lie.
Almost in passing, Trump crowed about his relationship with another hardline leader, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who long derided Netanyahu and compared him to Hitler. The Israeli leader is fiercely opposed to Turkish forces playing any role in the fragile peace settlement and rebuilding of Gaza.
If Netanyahu was perturbed by that, his poker-faced visage did not display it. He said Trump was the best friend among any US presidents Israel had ever had.
“We’ve never had a friend like President Trump in the White House,” Netanyahu said. “You can judge that by not merely by the frequency of our meetings, but by the content and the intensity. I think Israel is very blessed to have President Trump leading the United States.”
Later, at a lunch between the two, Netanyahu reinforced the amicable air by indulging Trump’s weakness for flattery, telling him that he would be the first non-Israeli to be awarded the Israel Prize, the Jewish state’s highest cultural honor.
That testimonial was, if anything, outmatched by an even more hyperbolic encomium from Trump, who said that Israel would no longer exist if it had been led in the past few years by any other prime minister.
“There could be other wartime prime ministers but they would lose,” he said at a formal news conference after the lunch. “He won. If you had a weak person, a stupid person — and there are plenty of both — you might not have Israel.”
In truth, the meeting came at a time of significant friction between the pair — and the words of praise disguised likely feelings of mutual irritation.
The White House is trying to press Netanyahu into entering into the second phase of Trump’s highly-prized 20-point Gaza peace plan — even as Netanyahu expresses reluctance to go along on the grounds that Hamas has not been properly disarmed.
Trump acknowledged his guest’s concerns, saying “there has to be a disarming of Hamas.” He was less solicitous when asked if reconstruction of the shattered coastal territory would begin before Hamas had been disarmed.
“I think it’s going to begin pretty soon,” he said, before adding: “He’s looking forward to it and so am I. What a mess.”
How to make sense of Trump’s utterances on Iran, whose uranium enrichment facilities in Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz he ordered bombed last June? The US strikes came after Israel had initially launched attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, as well as broader assaults that drew Iranian retaliation.
Trump has repeatedly insisted that the US action “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Yet here was Netanyahu back to argue the case for a renewed offensive amid reports that Tehran’s theocratic rulers are upgrading the country’s ballistic missile capabilities and trying to rebuild its damaged nuclear facilities.
In response, Trump acknowledged that “Iran may be behaving badly” but said that “it hasn’t been confirmed.” He hoped Tehran would negotiate a deal.
Would he support Israeli strikes if no deal was forthcoming? “If they continue with [ballistic] missiles, yes; the nuclear [program]? Fast,” he replied, before saying that the US would launch its own attack in the case of a resumed nuclear program. “One will be yes, absolutely. The other will be, we’ll do it immediately.”
Yet he drew the line at regime change, something Israel seemed to be aiming at last summer when it expanded attacks beyond military installations to target several Revolutionary Guard commanders, as well as bombing Tehran’s Evin prison, whose inmates include political prisoners and which has long been seen as a symbol of repression.
“I’m not going to talk about an overthrow of a regime,” Trump said. “They’ve got a lot of problems. They have tremendous inflation, their economy is bust and I know that the people aren’t so happy. But don’t forget, every time they have a riot or somebody forms a group, little or big, they start shooting people.”
It might have been intended as a caution to Netanyahu.
Clearer still was Trump’s message on Syria and its president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, who was hosted at the White House despite his past as a commander in rebel groups that formed part of the Islamic State and explicit hostility from Israel, which has branded his regime as “jihadist Islamist terrorists”.
“I hope he’s going to get along with Syria,” Trump said of Netanyahu. “Because the new president of Syria is working very hard to do a good job. He’s a tough cookie. [But] you’re not going to get a choir boy to lead Syria.”
Asked later if he and Netanyahu had reached an accord on the subject, Trump replied: “We do have an understanding regarding Syria.”
He then passed the baton to Netanyahu, who sounded less than thrilled. “Yeah, well. Our interest is to have a peaceful border with Syria. We want to make sure that the border area right next to our border is safe — that we don’t have terrorists.”
As understandings go, it sounded distinctly open to interpretation.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) provided several reasons for military drills it conducted in five zones around Taiwan on Monday and yesterday. The first was as a warning to “Taiwanese independence forces” to cease and desist. This is a consistent line from the Chinese authorities. The second was that the drills were aimed at “deterrence” of outside military intervention. Monday’s announcement of the drills was the first time that Beijing has publicly used the second reason for conducting such drills. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership is clearly rattled by “external forces” apparently consolidating around an intention to intervene. The targets of
RSS