Palestinians mourn next to bodies of relatives in the Baptist Hospital in Gaza City on Tuesday. At least four people were killed after in an attack by the Israeli army near the Netzarim checkpoint, according to Baptist Hospital. Photo by Haitham Imad/EPA-EFE
March 12 (UPI) -- For his next magic trick, President Donald Trump is determined to end three wars: one is in Gaza, the second in Ukraine and the third a conflict with Iran, which claims the United Sates is the world's largest exporter of terrorism.
Some will argue that these are impossible delusions. The barriers to past peace agreements have proven insurmountable, historically persistent and unyielding to compromise with one exception -- the Egyptian-Israeli treaty, consummated after the 1973 War and underwritten with billions of U.S. dollars paid to both signatories.
This dismal record does not mean attempts to end the bloodshed and violence are not unworthy or essential to reducing greater escalation. They simply have not worked. And there are no assurances they will.
Still, all wars must and do end. The questions are how and under what circumstances does an ending end?
In Gaza, the reality is that Hamas is part of the Strip's political DNA. Distinguishing between members of Hamas and non-aligned Palestinians has proven virtually impossible. This partly explains the 50,000 or so estimated dead. Gaza is virtually destroyed and dependent on outside support for food, medicines and other vital items just to subsist.
In Phase I of the ceasefire, prisoner exchanges grossly favored captured Palestinians in which 100 were returned for each Israeli. Many of the released Palestinians were convicted terrorists and serious criminals. This pause allowed a severely depleted Hamas to rejuvenate and regenerate its forces. And a Phase Two, when Israel will presumably withdraw, will accelerate Hamas' regeneration.
As a result, the dilemmas and hard points of any further negotiations are self-evident. What security commitments will Israel receive that will prevent future Sept. 7 attacks and respect Israeli sovereignty? Conversely, what guarantees do the Palestinians have about security, rebuilding and access to vital goods and services that Israel will not be able to control?
Further, who will govern Gaza and what are the guarantees that any Arab government will not attack Israel? Can Hamas be trusted not to continue its terrorist actions against Israel and Israelis and agree to a lasting peace? And would any peacekeeping force be able to maintain enough stability to minimize and eliminate the use of force against enemy publics?
As difficult as it is to forge a peace in Gaza, Ukraine may be even more problematic.
No matter what Trump asserts, it was Russia that attacked Ukraine, not the opposite. Ukraine has been badly battered for three years. It needs absolute guarantees to protect its sovereignty, independence, borders and security. And it will need continued aid and support to sustain its economy and military.
Further, who will deter Russia after an agreement is reached, if it is? Based on the record, Russia cannot be trusted to honor any agreement -- beginning with the 1994 Budapest Accords that, in exchange for removal of Soviet weapons stationed in Ukraine, Kyiv's independence would be "assured," not guaranteed in the agreement.
The Trump administration, after taking virtually every action to "tilt" in favor of Russia in this war by, at least temporarily, cutting off intelligence and military support to Ukraine, appears ready to accept an agreement regardless of Kyiv's interest.
(The United States planned to "immediately lift the pause on intelligence sharing and resume security assistance to Ukraine," both nations said Tuesday in a joint statement about their meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.)
The U.S. tilt toward Russia should come as no surprise. The South Vietnamese had no seat in the agreement with the north that ended the Republic of South Vietnam. Nor was Ashraf Ghani's Afghan government granted any input to the Doha Accords that ceded the country to the Taliban.
Trump is now trying to force an agreement that will eliminate any chance of Iran gaining a nuclear weapon. Ironically, the Obama administration's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action would have accomplished that had Iran abided by the agreement and had Trump not arbitrarily voided it. How Trump will end this conflict along with the other two is as vague as his plans for a new health care system.
Meanwhile, as Trump the peacemaker faces his promise to end these wars, his America First policies abroad are making allies into enemies and sparking a trade war that can only damage all parties.
At home, the Department of Government Efficiency -- ironically bent on cutting costs, not improving efficiency -- is dismantling huge chunks of the federal bureaucracy with little rhyme or reason.
What will happen? Peace will not be breaking out soon. And stock markets should give an indication of where this is headed.
Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He has advised a number of heads of governments and the most senior political and military leaders on these and other issues. A Vietnam-era Swift boat skipper with more than 150 combats patrols and operational missions, his next book, co-authored with The General Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense, is The Arc of Failure: Can Decisive Strategic Thinking Transform a Dangerous World?
