Features
Trump’s “Gaza 20-Point Plan”: Real Peace or Political Performance?
Published
4 months agoon
The Middle East has seen a dramatic turn of events in recent days. Hamas has made a rare gesture of goodwill, and Israel has, for the first time, issued an apology to Qatar. These unexpected signs of reconciliation amid the chaos have brought a faint glimmer of hope to the nearly two-year-long Gaza war. At the center of this shift lies U.S. President Donald Trump’s newly announced “Gaza 20-Point Peace Plan.”
The Gaza 20-Point Peace Plan
On September 29, Trump officially unveiled his 20-point plan aimed at achieving a comprehensive ceasefire, securing the release of hostages, and establishing a new political and security framework for Gaza’s future governance.
The plan’s core measures include:
-
An immediate ceasefire.
-
The release of all hostages and the return of bodies within 72 hours.
-
A phased withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.
-
The disarmament of Hamas and the relocation of its armed members outside the territory.
Beyond security arrangements, the plan also introduces a U.S.-led blueprint for Gaza’s reconstruction. All humanitarian aid would enter Gaza under the supervision of the United Nations and the Red Cross, focusing on rebuilding infrastructure, healthcare, and public services. Tunnels, weapons factories, and terrorist facilities would be dismantled and destroyed under international monitoring to ensure complete demilitarization.
A “multinational stabilization force” composed of the U.S. and several Arab nations would be deployed to maintain order, manage border control, and train Palestinian police units to ensure that Gaza no longer poses a security threat.
For governance, Gaza would be managed by a “technocratic Palestinian Transitional Council” overseen by a newly formed “Peace Council” chaired by Trump himself. Members would include international political figures such as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, tasked with coordinating reconstruction and governance.
Initial Responses from Both Sides
Following the plan’s announcement, intense diplomatic activity began. On October 3, Trump declared that Israel had agreed to establish an initial 1.5 to 3.5 km “withdrawal line” inside Palestinian territory. However, he emphasized that most Israeli troops would remain in Gaza until Hamas was fully disarmed.
That same night, Hamas released a statement expressing willingness to release all Israeli hostages and the remains of those killed, signaling readiness to enter negotiations “through mediating nations.” In an unexpected move, Hamas also indicated openness to handing over Gaza’s governance to a “technocratic government based on Palestinian national consensus, supported by Arab and Islamic countries.”
Still, Hamas has not explicitly accepted Israel’s key conditions, especially regarding disarmament and its exclusion from Gaza’s future administration. Its statement also avoided commenting on Trump’s clause barring Hamas from any role in governance, instead reiterating that Israel must halt all military operations and withdraw completely.
Senior Hamas official Moussa Abu Marzouk told reporters that they had “accepted all major elements of the U.S. proposal but that every item requires further discussion.” He added that disarmament could only be considered “after the end of the occupation and once Palestinians can govern themselves.” This suggests that while the ceasefire appears possible, fundamental disputes remain unresolved.
Currently, Israeli and Hamas delegations are meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, for a new round of ceasefire talks. As of October 8 (Australian time), discussions have focused on Israel’s withdrawal map and prisoner exchange mechanisms. Hamas insists that hostage releases must be directly tied to Israel’s full withdrawal timetable, and that any ceasefire agreement must come with genuine guarantees from the U.S. and regional powers.
To accelerate talks, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to arrive in Egypt on Wednesday, joined by Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed Al Thani and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin.
From Diplomatic Isolation to Seeking an “Exit Strategy”
The Gaza war, which began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked southern Israel, has dragged on for nearly two years, becoming one of the most devastating and protracted conflicts in recent history. Israeli retaliatory strikes have caused unprecedented destruction and a humanitarian catastrophe. According to Gaza’s Health Ministry, over 60,000 Palestinians have been killed, and essential infrastructure — hospitals, electricity, and water systems — has nearly collapsed.
While Israel claims to have severely weakened Hamas’s military capabilities, it has failed to secure a decisive victory. The prolonged war has reached the point of diminishing returns — the higher the military and political cost, the fewer tangible results. Mounting casualties and domestic unrest have eroded both Israeli morale and international sympathy. Several Western nations, including the U.K., Canada, and Australia, have now recognized the State of Palestine or condemned Israel for violating international humanitarian law. Even Washington — Israel’s closest ally — is facing growing diplomatic and political strain.
Tensions escalated further when Israel mistakenly fired a missile into Qatar, a key mediator and home to the largest U.S. base in the Middle East. The strike, which killed several civilians including the son of Hamas negotiator Khalil al-Hayya, drew sharp backlash from Doha and Washington. With global support waning and isolation deepening, Israel is under immense pressure to find an “off-ramp” — and Trump’s “20-point plan” may offer exactly that.
Netanyahu’s Political Dilemma
Domestically, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces unprecedented pressure. Anti-war protests have erupted across Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, demanding a ceasefire, the release of hostages, and accountability for the military’s actions. Polls show that over 60% of Israelis disapprove of Netanyahu’s wartime leadership.
His coalition — a fragile alliance of right-wing and ultra-religious factions — is deeply divided. The far-right demands continued military occupation of Gaza and rejects any negotiations, while moderates and senior defense officials advocate a temporary truce to prioritize hostage releases and postwar reconstruction talks. This internal split has left Netanyahu politically vulnerable: continuing the war could collapse his coalition, but agreeing to a ceasefire could brand him a “traitor.”
Last year, a short-lived U.S.-brokered truce collapsed within weeks after both sides accused each other of violations, leading to renewed Israeli operations that killed over 400 Palestinians. The episode exposed the disconnect between Israel’s government and military — a rift that still threatens current negotiations.
Unlike in Western democracies such as Australia, Israel’s military holds significant autonomy within its political system. Even if the government orders a ceasefire, field commanders may continue operations if they believe their missions are incomplete. During the previous truce, Israeli forces continued airstrikes in northern Gaza “to prevent Hamas regrouping,” killing hundreds — a reminder of the deep structural tensions within Israel’s security establishment, where “peace” is often seen as a strategic risk rather than a goal.
While external and internal pressures have pushed Israel to the negotiating table, achieving a lasting ceasefire remains uncertain. Critical questions — postwar reconstruction, Hamas’s political role, the scope of Israeli withdrawal, and Gaza’s future governance — are far from settled. Should talks collapse, the region could again spiral into violence.
Still, Israel’s willingness to engage in staged ceasefire talks under Trump’s framework marks a notable shift — an admission that military force alone cannot deliver security. When war yields only isolation and exhaustion, diplomacy becomes the only means of survival and rehabilitation.
Hamas Under Pressure and Reassessment
Hamas, too, faces mounting pressure. After nearly two years of war, its military and political capacities are in ruins. Gaza’s collapse is total — food, fuel, and medicine are scarce, and 80% of residents lack reliable access to food. Hospitals have shut down, and infectious diseases are spreading through overcrowded refugee camps. Public anger and despair are rising, and the demand to “end the war and return to normal life” grows louder each day.
Since late 2023, Israeli targeted strikes have decimated Hamas’s command structure, killing top figures such as Mohammed Deif and Marwan Issa. Many leaders have fled abroad, leaving local administrators — focused on civilian governance and aid coordination — in charge. These officials, more pragmatic than ideological, now view political survival and reconstruction as the only viable path forward.
Tensions between Hamas’s exiled leadership in Doha and Istanbul and its local Gaza leadership have widened. While exiles cling to hardline rhetoric, local leaders, witnessing the devastation firsthand, are increasingly inclined toward compromise. Regional allies such as Qatar and Turkey are also urging restraint. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has publicly called on Hamas to “show political maturity,” warning that continued fighting will only erode international support.
For Hamas, the war’s continuation means further suffering and loss of legitimacy among Palestinians. Under these conditions, Trump’s Gaza 20-Point Plan — despite its risks — offers a path of political survival and a last chance to avoid total marginalization.
Peace Through Transaction
Whether it’s disarming Hamas, deploying Arab peacekeepers, or placing Gaza under international trusteeship, many of these ideas have surfaced before — only to fail under political realities. Trump’s 20-point plan may seem like a repackaged version of earlier proposals, yet its rapid traction reflects his pragmatic timing and deal-making acumen.
Trump’s approach relies on pressure as leverage. Within months of taking office, his administration froze some military aid to Israel, cracked down on Hamas-linked financial networks, and warned mediating nations like Qatar and Egypt of “isolation” if they failed to cooperate. Though criticized as heavy-handed, these tactics forced all parties back to the negotiating table. Trump’s version of “peace” is not driven by morality, but by calculated pragmatism — making both sides realize that continuing the war costs more than compromise.
His “deal-making diplomacy” mirrors a cold business negotiation: clear terms, tight deadlines, and few emotions. When he announced Israel’s immediate halt to airstrikes last Friday — reportedly without prior notice to Netanyahu’s cabinet — it left Israel with no choice but to comply. Meanwhile, Hamas was told to respond by Sunday or face renewed U.S.-approved Israeli offensives. Trump’s peace, therefore, is less about justice than enforced submission — a harsh but effective pause to the bloodshed.
This recalls the ancient Chinese concept of “Zhao’an” (招安) — pacifying rebels through a mix of power and incentives, offering surrender as survival. Like the heroes of Water Margin accepting imperial amnesty, or warlords in Romance of the Three Kingdoms submitting when the balance of power shifted, both Hamas and Israel now seek self-preservation under Trump’s imposed order.
From a broader geopolitical lens, Trump’s strategy does not resolve the conflict’s root causes. Instead, it forces a temporary strategic pause — stabilizing the battlefield long enough to reshape the negotiation landscape. For Trump, this is both a foreign policy victory and political spectacle. For civilians trapped in Gaza, even a fragile ceasefire offers a precious glimpse of life beyond war.
Whatever the outcome of the 20-point negotiations, the world can only hope that the guns in Gaza will soon fall silent.
You may like
Raymond Chow

My New Challenge
Over the past few decades, I’ve written numerous books and articles on a wide variety of topics. However, last October, I decided to write a book entirely different from anything I had done before, titled Solitary but Not Isolated. I chose to publish it through crowdfunding. Readers interested in supporting this book can visit the following webpage to learn more and help make it a reality.
I attended a rooftop school in Hong Kong for primary education (a unique feature of Hong Kong in the 1960s: temporary classrooms built on top of apartment blocks in resettlement areas to accommodate children who had moved into the district). Resources were extremely limited. In sixth grade, the school principal gave me and seven other students the opportunity to post our writings on the bulletin board every two weeks for the whole school to read. This was my first experience of writing for a public audience.
In secondary school at Queen’s College, the school published the annual magazine The Yellow Dragon, the earliest and longest-running secondary school annual in Hong Kong. My writings were never published there, though my photos occasionally appeared in reports of school activities. At university, I volunteered as editor for a scholarly publication by the Science Society called Exploration, but after two or three years it was discontinued as no one wished to continue it.
During university, I studied mathematics, which required little essay writing—mostly problem-solving. After entering the field of education, I wrote numerous articles on Hong Kong education that were published in newspaper columns. Later, through curriculum development and teacher training in Hong Kong, I had the rare opportunity to write and publish mathematics textbooks spanning from Grade 1 to Form 7—something unprecedented in Hong Kong.
After moving to Australia, I served as editor of the Christian publication Living Monthly, and eventually founded Sameway magazine, which continues today. From the first issue, I wrote the opening column Words of Sameway, and over 21 years, I have written a total of 745 pieces—a record of my life.
Yet writing Solitary but Not Isolated is something I never anticipated doing since I first learned about autism decades ago. Publishing this book is closely connected to my work with Sameway. I can only say this is a new challenge given by God, a chance to take Sameway to a new stage.
Those Who Love Solitude
Solitary but Not Isolated tells the story of a person with autism. Based on her experiences, the Happy Hands Organization has developed a bilingual training program to help autistic individuals transition from school to the workplace. Launched this year, the program aims to support others in similar circumstances.
Most people with autism do not actively seek social interactions. When they do engage with strangers, they may appear difficult to connect with or communicate with, often leading to social neglect or isolation. For parents and family, this creates a lifelong burden. Even those who complete secondary or tertiary education, despite having professional knowledge, often cannot fully utilize their abilities at work because of incomplete social understanding and lack of basic communication skills. Consequently, they are frequently relegated to jobs that do not match their abilities or are assigned work requiring minimal interaction.
Western society’s understanding of autism began with the lifestyle demands of modern life, emphasizing early social engagement and learning in school. Families, having fewer children, often pay close attention to each child’s development and have higher expectations. Over the decades, understanding of autism has evolved—from viewing it as a mental illness to recognizing it as a deviation from typical personality development. Yet how society should assist their growth remains uncertain.
Decades ago, Western focus was on “treating” autism. Research into genetic, environmental, or physical causes has made limited progress. Interventions to change solitary behaviors are also limited—for example, providing speech therapy in childhood or occupational therapy for daily living skills offers only partial support. While societal acceptance and support for autistic individuals have greatly increased, parents feel that more is needed when their children enter adult life and the workforce.
In short, those inclined toward solitude still face a gap in having equal opportunities to thrive socially and professionally.
Understanding Society and the World
Many autistic individuals focus intensely on specific interests, with little experience in social relationships or current events. As adults, this often leads others to perceive them as unaware of society, or even “odd.” In workplaces, where collaboration is essential, they may face exclusion. Many end up in solitary work with minimal social interaction.
Among Chinese communities, first- or second-generation immigrants with autism often face compounded challenges due to limited knowledge of society. Parents, unfamiliar with Australian systems, cannot fully guide their children, and these high-ability individuals rarely integrate with society, limiting opportunities to demonstrate their potential.
In 2024, ABC launched The Assembly, a TV interview program where host Leigh Sales trained 15 autistic individuals to conduct interviews and produce the show. Participants significantly increased their understanding of society and the world, and their communication and social skills improved greatly.
Last year, Sameway had the opportunity to train a bilingual autistic new immigrant, successfully helping her become a magazine editor. Meanwhile, the Happy Hands Organization developed a workplace adaptation program for bilingual, high-functioning autistic individuals. Through four to six months of training, this program offers these often-overlooked individuals a chance to adapt and develop in Australia.
Thus, Sameway is not only an information platform supporting immigrant communities but also provides a development space and opportunities for those with special needs. Readers interested can contact our magazine or the Happy Hands Organization for details.
The Loneliness of Immigrants
Many immigrants arrive in Australia as adults. They often lack opportunities to understand society deeply and, due to work and life commitments, rarely have the time to engage fully with their new environment or develop close relationships with Australians. Consequently, most live within Chinese communities with similar backgrounds. Passive personalities or limited social skills often lead to intense feelings of loneliness.
Leaving their original home and social networks creates a sense of marginalization similar to that experienced by some autistic individuals. Many immigrants are willing to understand and engage with their new society but face personal limitations and a lack of proactive governmental support, leaving them unable to integrate fully into Australian life.
Chinese immigrants, in particular, may rely heavily on long-term Chinese social media and information platforms, further isolating them from the broader society. This social isolation significantly affects their participation and engagement in Australian life.
The goal of Sameway is to assist immigrants in integrating into Australia, fostering participation and engagement in society. We hope that with continued support, we can go further and achieve more.

During the Christmas and New Year period, “Sameway” relocated though only to a spot less than 100 meters across from their original office. It was a tiring task, but we have finally settled in, allowing us to take a longer break during the holiday.
However, the world still undergoes significant changes. The President of Venezuela has been forcibly taken to New York for trial, while the new leader of Venezuela is willing to govern in line with U.S. interests. The longstanding alliance between Europe and the U.S. has become history in light of the U.S. attempt to purchase Greenland. The “Board of Peace” established by Trump requests that nations place the keeping of global peace in his personal hands, but attendees at the invitation include authoritarian dictators who have initiated wars multiple times. The generation that has grown up advocating for global integration, respect for human rights, and peaceful coexistence is now at a lost and confused. Will the world revert to a chaotic state governed by the law of the jungle, where strong countries dominate weaker ones, or can humanity choose to move forward in civilization by learning mistakes from history? We truly have no sure answer.
However, it is a time where the rise of Trump and the increasing power of global far-right political forces, coupled with the internet and social media replacing traditional media as the main source of information for many people. This has led to a society overwhelmed with information and challenges in distinguishing truth from falsehood, which is equally as frightening as an era where information is blocked, preventing access to necessary knowledge.
In Australia, as a multicultural country, immigrants face significant difficulties in obtaining lifestyle information through mainstream media. I believe that to build Australia as a harmonious and cohesive society, the government must invest substantial resources to assist immigrant communities to establish high-quality and credible multicultural media, and to accelerate the integration of first-generation immigrants into society, allowing them to become a driving force in social development.
In the past year, we have strengthened the current affairs information provided on our website. In the coming year, we will focus on enhancing our information services for the Chinese community through our broadcasts and magazine publications. I hope you can support us in achieving the goal of promoting the development of the Chinese immigrant community.
Starting this year, in line with the REJOICE’s initiative for bilingual new immigrants with autism, I will be writing a brand-new column to explore this topic with the community as they navigate With the NDIS program. I hope this innovative program by the REJOICE will receive your support for promotion and development within the community.
Additionally, after three years of training aimed at encouraging seniors to use social platforms to expand their community engagement, we will take a further step this year by launching training courses to assist seniors in using artificial intelligence. Our goal is to help Chinese seniors in Australia stay up-to-date and enjoy a higher quality of life brought about by AI.
In the new year, let us work together to build a stronger local Chinese community.

Since January 20, 2025, when Trump assumed the U.S. presidency once again, domestic issues in America have been frequent and complex, but the world cannot deny that his foreign policy has reshaped the global political landscape, ushering in a new era.
Over the past year, Trump has been extremely proactive in foreign affairs—from Greenland to Venezuela—demonstrating relentless ambition to expand U.S. influence abroad, even amid controversy and the risk of destabilizing other nations.
Prelude to 2025
Let’s briefly review Trump’s major foreign policy actions in 2025.
First, his involvement in the Gaza Strip cannot be overlooked. In February 2025, he publicly stated that the U.S. would play a more active, even leading, role in the region, supporting Israel’s security needs, including strengthening border defense and intelligence sharing. He also attempted to broker ceasefire talks in the U.S.’s name, coordinating Egypt, Qatar, and other countries as intermediaries. By October, Trump personally attended a multilateral meeting in Sharm El-Sheikh, pushing for a ceasefire agreement and reconstruction framework between Israel and Hamas.
While opinions on his approach were divided, with some critics arguing that direct intervention could heighten regional tensions, Trump nonetheless reaffirmed America’s influence and presence in Middle Eastern affairs.
Early in 2025, the Trump administration reviewed all foreign aid and temporarily halted military assistance to Ukraine, using it as leverage to push forward negotiations. By mid-March, following U.S.–Ukraine consultations, military and security support resumed, including air defense systems, drone technology, and financial assistance. The U.S. also advocated international sanctions against Russia, such as high-tech export restrictions and asset freezes. These actions demonstrated Trump’s support for strategic allies and further solidified U.S. influence in Europe.
While these events may seem unrelated, they set the stage for early 2026’s diplomatic developments.
The Venezuela Raid
Trump’s most notable action in January 2026 was the sudden capture (or abduction) of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.
In fact, as early as December 1, 2025, Trump had called Maduro, demanding he step down. When Maduro refused, Trump publicly ramped up pressure in mid-to-late December, applying economic and military pressure—including blockades, intercepting suspicious ships, and bolstering military deployments—to isolate the Maduro government. He even hinted that further U.S. action might follow if Maduro continued to resist, signaling a preemptive warning.
The result: U.S. forces launched a large-scale operation codenamed “Absolute Determination”, storming Caracas, capturing Maduro and his wife, and transporting them to New York for trial. The justification cited Maduro and his inner circle’s involvement in drug trafficking and terrorism, including conspiracies to smuggle cocaine into the U.S. At the same time, Maduro’s government had close ties with China and Russia, who provided military and economic support, posing a threat to U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere.
The operation was also seen as a move to block rival powers from gaining leverage in Venezuela. More importantly, given Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, Trump clearly aimed to reassert U.S. dominance in the hemisphere and secure economic benefits. For many Americans, the raid showcased U.S. military might, boosting Trump’s prestige and approval. True to form, Trump paid little attention to criticism, focusing instead on praise, and was visibly self-satisfied.
International reactions were strong. China and Russia immediately condemned the U.S. action, calling it a severe violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and international law. Iran and other nations with tense U.S. relations also criticized the operation as unilateralism under the guise of anti-drug and anti-terrorism efforts, destabilizing the region.
European responses were mixed. Some EU countries long critical of Maduro still expressed reservations about the U.S. bypassing international authorization for direct military action, emphasizing that even dealing with authoritarian regimes should follow international mechanisms. This tension revealed the strain Trump’s style places on traditional allies.
In Latin America, reactions were split: anti-Maduro governments and Venezuelan opposition privately supported the move as a chance to break political deadlock, while others feared overt U.S. military intervention might revive Cold War-era “Monroe Doctrine” fears, worsening regional security.
Currently, former Vice President Rodríguez serves as interim president of Venezuela, cooperating with the U.S. while maintaining loyalty to the domestic ruling class, keeping the country relatively stable. For Trump, the goal of preventing other powers from gaining influence in the Americas and securing economic gains was achieved. Many Americans saw the raid as a demonstration of military strength, reinforcing Trump’s image as a decisive leader.
Trump’s Greenland Gambit
Since 2025, Trump has repeatedly brought Greenland into the spotlight, making it one of the most challenging and controversial topics of his second term.
Greenland, the world’s largest island, is under Danish sovereignty but enjoys local autonomy. Its location between North America and Europe along the Arctic shipping route has made it strategically valuable. Previously overlooked due to extreme cold, climate change and melting ice have expanded Arctic navigation, increasing Greenland’s military and technological importance. The island also contains vast deposits of rare earth and critical minerals, essential for modern technology and defense systems.
Trump’s assertive approach clearly aimed to maximize U.S. influence over Greenland. In 2025, he publicly expressed interest in buying Greenland and urged negotiations to secure it, even hinting at military options. This escalated tensions with Denmark and Europe.
European reactions were unanimous: Greenlandic leaders stated the island is “not for sale”, and massive protests erupted in Greenland and Denmark. The UK prime minister warned Trump that high tariffs or aggression would be a grave mistake, while EU countries—including Denmark, France, Germany, and the UK—supported Danish sovereignty. Even European far-right parties, traditionally aligned with Trump, criticized his Greenland strategy as overt aggression, causing internal rifts.
At the 2026 Davos World Economic Forum, Trump and NATO Secretary-General Rutte reached a “preliminary framework” focusing on Arctic security cooperation rather than territorial control. Trump framed it as safeguarding U.S. military bases and economic interests, while Denmark retained final authority. However, Greenland’s government stressed it was not fully involved in negotiations, highlighting an ongoing tension. Analysts debate whether this is a tactical retreat or pragmatic compromise.
Even with the temporary easing of tensions, U.S.–Europe trust has been strained, showing how far-reaching Trump’s assertive diplomacy has become.
Iran Unrest and U.S. Pressure
From late December 2025, Iran experienced nationwide protests, initially triggered by economic collapse, currency devaluation, and skyrocketing living costs, evolving into broad dissatisfaction with the regime. The government’s harsh crackdown led to casualties and arrests on a scale unseen since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
The U.S., which maintains heavy sanctions against Iran citing terrorism sponsorship and nuclear/military threats, seized this moment to intervene. Trump publicly announced deploying a fleet—including aircraft carriers and missile destroyers—to the Persian Gulf to deter further escalation. He emphasized a preference for avoiding force but warned of potential military action if the regime continued violent repression.
Trump also communicated with Iranian protesters via public statements and social media, encouraging demonstrations and denouncing government violence. He canceled all official diplomatic talks until Tehran ceased the crackdown. While some protesters hoped for U.S. support, the absence of direct action led to frustration and feelings of abandonment.
Iranian Revolutionary Guard leaders warned that any U.S. strike would be considered a full-scale war. Protests and anti-U.S. imagery reflected strong resistance. Intelligence reports indicating a temporary halt in state violence led Trump to consider pausing military actions while closely monitoring the situation, balancing threats with cautious observation.
Trump’s strategy combined military presence and public warnings to pressure Tehran, deter large-scale killings, and strengthen U.S. influence in the Middle East. Yet this high-risk approach also raised the possibility of miscalculations, where tensions could escalate unintentionally, making the U.S. a target for criticism and resistance.
The “Board of Peace”
Traditionally, the U.S. has been seen as the global big brother. But with China’s growing influence and global economic support programs, U.S. presidents often feel impatient with Beijing’s increasing UN sway. Trump, ambitious and assertive, sought to take matters further.
At the 2026 Davos Forum, he launched the “Board of Peace”, initially proposed to address Gaza peace but now expanded to serve as a broader global conflict mediation mechanism. The initiative leverages U.S. influence to create an alternative diplomatic platform and invites multiple countries to participate.
However, critics question whether it is more for show than genuine peacekeeping. The EU’s concern lies less with the stated goals and more with the lack of clarity: the legal status, decision-making process, funding, and international law accountability remain unspecified. Unlike multilateral bodies like the UN or OSCE, this U.S.-backed, president-driven mechanism risks becoming a coercive tool rather than a genuine mediator.
The EU fears it could undermine Europe’s long-standing role in Middle East diplomacy, forcing it from rule-maker to follower. China was excluded, reflecting Trump’s view of Beijing as a competitor, not a partner. The Board aims to present participation as a political statement, effectively creating a U.S.-led bloc in global conflict mediation.
For Australia, the Board is a hot potato. Prime Minister Albanese received an invitation but has not confirmed participation. Several NATO and EU countries have declined, while Canada was disinvited over disagreements on China policy. Thirty-plus leaders who accepted include war actors like Putin and Israel’s Netanyahu. How they could effectively promote peace remains questionable, and handling the invitation diplomatically will test Albanese’s political skill.
Trump’s Diplomatic Logic
Across Gaza, Ukraine, Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, and the Board of Peace, Trump’s strategy is consistent: proactive engagement, pressure, disruption of norms, and forcing allies and adversaries to recalculate. He eschews slow multilateral negotiations in favor of military, economic, and media leverage, coupled with highly personalized decision-making, shifting power quickly at the negotiating table.
To Trump, diplomacy is a continuous game of strategy, not merely maintaining order. He pushes situations to the edge, then retreats strategically to gain advantage. While controversial and eroding trust among allies, it successfully recenters U.S. influence.
Crucially, Trump applies pressure not only to adversaries but to allies, forcing them to demonstrate loyalty or strategic value. This increases U.S. bargaining leverage but consumes trust capital, making international relations more transactional and short-term, and setting the stage for future friction.
Costs and Risks of Assertive Diplomacy
Reliance on pressure and uncertainty may yield short-term results but risks long-term instability. Highly personalized, low-institutional approaches erode trust in rules, procedures, and multilateral cooperation. Misjudgments are more likely in opaque, high-stakes situations. Allies and adversaries may misread threats, escalating conflict even without provocation.
Trump is reshaping U.S. diplomacy from guardian of order to rewriter of order, providing tactical flexibility but weakening institutional credibility. Whether the U.S. can balance assertive pressure with sustained trust will determine its long-term global leadership.
Ultimately, Trump’s strategy may open new strategic space for the U.S. or provoke deeper backlash and confrontation. One thing is certain: the international stage in 2026 is no longer the old world, and Trump is the key variable driving this structural transformation.





Listen Now

Pro-Trump Brazilian Influencer Arrested by U.S. ICE
German Chancellor Merz Discusses “Shared Nuclear Umbrella” with European Allies
One Nation’s “Spot the Westerner” Video Condemned
Littleproud retains leadership, Sussan Ley’s position uncertain
Starmer suggests Prince Andrew testify to US Congress
Fraudulent ivermectin studies open up new battleground
Cantonese Mango Sago
FILIPINO: Kung nakakaranas ka ng mga sumusunod na sintomas, mangyaring subukan.
如果您出現以下症狀,請接受檢測。
保护您自己和家人 – 咳嗽和打喷嚏时请捂住
Victorian Government Issues Historic Apology to Indigenous Peoples
Australia and U.S. Finalize Expanded U.S. Military Presence and Base Upgrade Plan
7.5-Magnitude Earthquake Strikes Off Northeastern Coast of Japan
Paramount Challenges Netflix with Warner Bros Acquisition Bid
Thailand Strikes Cambodia as Border Clashes Escalate
Trending
-
COVID-19 Around the World4 years agoFraudulent ivermectin studies open up new battleground
-
Cuisine Explorer5 years agoCantonese Mango Sago
-
Tagalog5 years agoFILIPINO: Kung nakakaranas ka ng mga sumusunod na sintomas, mangyaring subukan.
-
Uncategorized5 years ago如果您出現以下症狀,請接受檢測。
-
Cantonese - Traditional Chinese5 years ago保护您自己和家人 – 咳嗽和打喷嚏时请捂住
-
Uncategorized5 years agoCOVID-19 檢驗快速 安全又簡單
-
Uncategorized5 years agoHow to wear a face mask 怎麼戴口罩
-
Uncategorized6 years ago
在最近的 COVID-19 應對行動中, 維多利亞州並非孤單

