In my column yesterday, I expressed my reservations about Hamas actually being collectively willing to follow through with the promises made — that is, its relinquishing of power. By collectively I mean, is everyone in Hamas in agreement with those promises? I pointed out the public executions Hamas is carrying out on people who had been working against it, and concluded that no, it's not:
Clearly, though, Hamas is not in the mood to give up its power, rather opting to try to hold onto that power by means of intimidation. What the response of the IDF and Washington will be is open to speculation. So far, the response from President Trump, in a statement to reporters, has been thus: "Well, they’re going to disarm because they said they were going to disarm, and if they don’t disarm, we will disarm them."
Have you ever found yourself in a discussion (perhaps an argument) where, a few hours afterward, your mind comes up with comments or questions you wished you had said?
Somewhat chagrined, I find myself in that position right now.
In my piece yesterday, along with questions about the intentions of Hamas, I also expressed a mistrust of the Democrats' reaction to the peace deal's success, but I passed it off as Democrat party infighting. Now, I’m not so sure it was just that. On reflection, the reaction seemed to me too pat, too coordinated, and WAY out of character.
Granted, that their reaction was the politically correct one, but the trend has always been with the Democrats that, given a choice between right and wrong, the Democrats will choose the latter every time. As a matter of documented history, the two biggest destroyers of life and of civilization have been Islam and Communism. The Democrats, therefore, have embraced the two most deadly and destructive ideologies we’ve ever known. In light of this, and so out of character and seemingly coordinated were these very carefully worded and begrudging public responses to the peace deal, that instinct demanded an answer to the questions of why now, and why the change?
In considering these questions, I got the distinct impression that some underhanded strategy or another was in play, but said little because I wouldn’t quite nail down the suspicion. In later private discussions, I mentioned that I smelled a setup. That if and when Hamas started asserting its control again, the left would have something to point to, supposedly as proof of Trump being out of his depth. There seemed to be an assuredness in the Democrat response that could only be justified by their covert and mutual understanding that the deal WOULD fail.
Trump, given his comments (which I quoted above), seems to be looking at phase two of the deal being accomplished soon. In his excellent (and otherwise hopeful) piece yesterday here on PJ Media, Ben Shapiro isn’t so sure:
Given Hamas' attempts to reconsolidate control of the areas of the Gaza Strip from which Israel has withdrawn, it is doubtful that phase two will ever come into play. Will Arab and Muslim nations supply a peacekeeping force to make the Strip quiescent and finally stop Hamas' murderous reign? If not, how will an interim government ever take power? These questions remain open.
Quite so; I do not disagree, and I would add the question, will we see such force from other Islamic nations being applied to force Hamas out, or to support them? That point stuck in my head for most of yesterday afternoon.
Several hours after my piece got published yesterday, the reason for my unease finally dawned on me. It is the possibility, nay, the probability of the Democrat party influence in these matters, and with it, the international left.
For example, is there funding and behind-the-scenes efforts for Hamas to maintain control? Such funding and such influence could quietly come from, as an example, a number of Soros-backed NGOs, many of which already have had their fingers in the pie over there. I point to the Tides Foundation and its long-standing connections with Iran, through people like John Kerry, as one possibility.
Granted, that sounds like a stretch on the surface. I recognize that my footing here is insecure at best. Perhaps I am being overly suspicious, and if you’re drawing that conclusion, I promise you, I won’t be overly loud in my own defense on this point.
The thing that’s bugging me is this: Given the foaming-at-the-mouth desperation the left in the U.S. has been showing us for over a decade now over anything and everything Trumpian, can we really believe, do we honestly trust, that the left would leave that huge feather in Trump's red cap unmolested?
Iran has a lot riding on the continuance of strife in the region. Do we trust that with all this on the line, Iran and its backers are going to simply withdraw from the field? Otherwise, will this end up being like so many times in the past, where a peace treaty gets used as a weapon?
Since the past is prologue, the existence of such meddling seems at least a reasonable bet.
This deserves watching.
Ready for honest reporting and commentary that puts the American people first — not the career politicians in Washington? Join PJ Media VIP today. Get 74% off your membership when you use promo code POTUS47.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member