As the world applauds Trump’s Gaza peace plan, columnist Jack Engelhard cautions that behind the celebration lurks a renewed push to force Israel into a perilous two-state solution.
It’s a day of celebration — the hostages are home, the guns have fallen silent, and the world hails peace. But as Jack Engelhard reminds us, beware the applause.
In his unmistakable style, Engelhard — author, columnist, and chronic truth-teller — writes that while the return of Israeli hostages marks a moment of national relief, the fine print of the global praise feels eerily familiar. “I feel, I smell, I taste a two-state solution being foisted upon the Jewish State,” he warns.
The fear is not imaginary. With world leaders converging in Egypt to crown President Trump’s peace initiative, the chorus is growing: “Come on, Israel, join the club. Don’t be the odd one out. Be grateful, be reasonable — accept the two-state solution.”
But Engelhard sees the trap — a replay of the same diplomatic illusions that have endangered Israel time and again. “To be ‘grateful,’ they say, is to surrender land, prisoners, and sovereignty. Sorry, but that’s not gratitude — that’s suicide,” he writes.
He recalls how this pattern dates back to Trump’s first term: Part One of the “Deal of the Century” — recognizing Jerusalem, affirming Israel’s rights in the Golan, and forging the Abraham Accords — was a diplomatic masterpiece. But Part Two, crafted by Jared Kushner, sought to placate the Palestinians with concessions that Netanyahu could never, and should never, accept.
“They called him ungrateful,” Engelhard writes. “But better ungrateful than unsafe.”
The veteran columnist contrasts Netanyahu’s unbending resolve with the weak-kneed appeasement of previous Israeli leaders who “offered nearly everything, including the kitchen sink — and Jerusalem.” The result? Temporary popularity abroad, and lasting vulnerability at home.
Now, Engelhard fears, history is circling back. “They’ll call it peace, but it’s pressure. They’ll call it partnership, but it’s a prelude to surrender.”
For Engelhard, being stubborn and unpopular are badges of honor if it means protecting the security, sovereignty, and soul of the Jewish State. “I’ll take unpopular, and stubborn, and difficult,” he writes, “if it means unyielding for the safety of Israel.”
In a world drunk on symbolism, Engelhard’s realism cuts through like a siren: the peace of the brave must never become the peace of the deceived.
