Trump’s Art of the Lie

A Gaza “peace plan” built on deception, exclusion, and betrayal of Palestinians, dressed up as diplomacy.

Should anyone really be surprised by Donald Trump’s duplicity and his mastery of the con? He never should have written “The Art of the Deal.” A far more honest title would have been “The Art of the Lie” - a truer reflection of who he is and what he stands for.

Earlier this week, Trump unveiled a new “peace plan” for Gaza, which has been described by conservative sycophants like Greg Sheridan as a “brilliant” breakthrough.

A breakthrough to a negotiated peace settlement or a serious roadmap to end the violence it isn’t. What it is though, is a con concocted between Washington and Tel Aviv, designed to serve American and Israeli interests while excluding the very people most affected - Palestinians.

The most glaring flaw in Trump’s plan to win the Noble Peace Prize, is the most obvious – Hamas. Hamas haven’t been part of any negotiations. A peace settlement requires both parties of a conflict to agree on terms. Yet Trump, alongside Netanyahu, has marketed the plan as though bypassing Hamas somehow isolates and delegitimises them while still resolving the conflict.

Netanyahu himself made the reality clear. Addressing Israelis after leaving the White House, the genocidal war criminal declared Israel would never negotiate with Hamas, nor accept any peace deal that legitimises them. That alone reveals the contradiction of Trump’s plan. If Israel rejects peace with Hamas, and Hamas is excluded from talks, then Trump’s plan isn’t a peace settlement – it’s an imposed framework aimed at entrenching the status quo.

Sheridan as a geopolitical analyst is disturbing at the best of times, and his ignorance continues to manifest in ways that consistently remain fascinating.

Sheridan paints Trump’s plan as a masterstroke - a ceasefire, staged Israeli withdrawal, prisoner exchanges, humanitarian aid, and an international “Board of Peace” chaired by Trump himself with another war criminal Tony Blair featuring in a starring role. On paper, it reads like a grand geopolitical bargain. But scratch the surface and the problems multiply.

First, there’s no evidence that Gulf states or wider Muslim nations genuinely back the deal how Sheridan claims it does. Arab leaders have repeatedly emphasised any credible peace requires Palestinian representation.

Any idea Washington can “unite the Islamic world” behind a US-Israel diktat is simply delusional. The proposal also assumes Hamas will just hand over hostages, disarm, and relinquish authority in Gaza without any role in shaping the region’s future. That’s not a peace deal—it’s capitulation dressed as diplomacy.

For Netanyahu, the Trump plan offers two tactical benefits - international cover to continue his military operations, and an escape route from mounting global pressure over civilian casualties in Gaza. By borrowing Trump’s White House the veneer of a peace process, Israel deflects criticism without making substantive concessions. The plan preserves Israeli military dominance, while dangling the promise of reconstruction aid that may never materialise.

Netanyahu’s speech after leaving Washington was telling. He reaffirmed Israel’s hardline position - no recognition of Hamas, no binding peace settlement, and no compromise on Israel’s security prerogatives. Netanyahu’s comments in themself demolish Sheridan’s claim that this initiative “creates space for Netanyahu to manoeuvre towards the centre.” What it does do is entrench the far-right narrative that peace can be imposed on Palestinians rather than negotiated with them.

The most cynical element is the proposal to establish a “technocratic administration” in Gaza, overseen by an international board led by Trump and Blair - stripping Palestinians of agency over their own governance. History shows externally imposed administrations—whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Bosnia—rarely deliver legitimacy or stability. In Gaza, where Palestinians have endured decades of blockade, bombardment, and economic strangulation, an unelected authority imposed by Washington will be seen as occupation by another name.

Sheridan’s claims that this would be “fabulous for Palestinians” portrays a profound ignorance of Palestinian history and aspirations. Palestinians have consistently demanded sovereignty, dignity, and self-determination - not an American-chaired board dictating their future while Israeli troops remain at the perimeter.

More fascinating is how Trump’s own track record underscores the hollowness of this initiative. Trump’s foreign policy is littered with grandiose announcements that collapse under scrutiny. From North Korea to Afghanistan, his “deals” have consistently prioritised optics over outcomes. The Gaza plan isn’t any different. It places Trump at the centre - as chair of the Board of Peace - ensuring his ego, not Palestinian rights, drives the agenda.

Even Sheridan admits Trump’s schemes “always look best on the day they’re announced.” But hailing his plan as “the most positive development in two years,” ignores peace can’t be negotiated in the absence of Hamas to the conflict. Pretending otherwise is a con.

Another insidious aspect of Trump’s plan and Sheridan’s commentary is the narrative the “onus for ending Palestinian suffering rests with Hamas.” It absolves Israel of responsibility for decades of occupation, blockade, and disproportionate military force and ignores the fundamental truth - even if Hamas vanished tomorrow, Palestinians would still be denied sovereignty, freedom of movement, and political rights.

Trump’s plan is designed to fail. It allows Washington and Tel Aviv to claim the mantle of peacemakers while setting conditions they know Hamas won’t accept. When Hamas inevitably rejects Trump’s sham of a plan, Trump and Netanyahu will argue Palestinians are the obstacle to peace, justifying continued military operations – it’s a public relations strategy aimed at shifting blame.

Sheridan’s analysis suffers from historical amnesia. Every credible peace initiative - from the Oslo Accords to the Arab Peace Initiative - has recognised the need for direct negotiation between Israelis and Palestinians. Excluding Hamas may suit Netanyahu and Trump, but it ensures the plan’s collapse. Describing it as “brilliant diplomacy” ignores the most basic principle of conflict resolution - you can’t end a war by silencing one side.

Trump’s Gaza “peace plan” isn’t a breakthrough its a dangerous sham. It offers Palestinians no genuine voice, grants Israel continued control and reduces international diplomacy to a stage-managed performance.

Sheridan’s gushing praise is less an act of analysis than of cheerleading, ignoring the plan’s internal contradictions and its deliberate exclusion of Palestinians.