"The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity" Dialogical Reflections on the Tractability of the Intractable

 

Pix Credit here

"Trump and the leaders of Qatar, Egypt and Turkey, the countries that were acting as key mediators, held an official signing ceremony for the Gaza peace plan. Notably missing from the signing ceremony were the two parties expected to abide by the peace plan: Israel and Hamas. The president praised the "amazing array of talent" in the U.S. who helped get the deal across the finish line, as well as help from Qatar, Egypt and Turkey." (CNBC News)

 The text of  The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity follows below. 

1.  Marketing Power Relations;. The document references the "Trump Peace Agreement"--a reference to the American Peace Plan for Gaza (my discussion here: America First as a Template for the Global: Text of the U.S. Cease-Fire Plan for Gaza). One of the most interesting things about the agreement  and this Declaration was not its terms of its positive sentiments but rather its performative semiotics: in transactions of this kind, there are two sorts of transactional objects--those who negotiate the deal and the objects of deal making. In the former club were the  "mediating" states--lumped together in a sort of quite interesting equality was the State of Israel and the vanguard organization Hamas. There is nothing wrong with this--but the "this" exists, and it might well reflect not just the contextual necessities of the moment but perhaps less consciously some quite deeply held culturally specific cognitive tropes (discussed Brief Reflections on Recent Messages of the Trump Administration to Religious Communities on Michaelmas and Yom Kippur). This is neither good nor bad and perhaps it is with the knowledge of this cognitive cage that the Israelis may act strategically. 

Pix credit here

2. Queen of the Damned. The Declaration is about a conflict and the role that each have taken upon themselves with respect to the ceasefire. Each observes the fundamental rule of vampires--they are not allowed in unless invited.  And, as has been the practice of the last cycle of violence and ceasefire, each has been invited by one of the objects on which they all work. The signatory powers have taken it upon themselves to "act on" belligerents. That produces both the normative and forms of transactions in peace--which focus on cessation of violence as its core, followed by a dialectic of transformation or of attrition (considered more abstractly in On the 2nd Anniversary of the 7 October Hamas-Led Gazan Attack on Israel). Yet it is precisely the first step that counts; the rest will run its own course, aided, to come extent by the facilitators who signed onto the Declaration  to end the current violence. . . and no more. The great tension in the Declaration, then, is between the transactional sensibilities of cease fire with the institutional imperatives of a stable managed "peace", whatever that means (see below).  

3. Incantations have power. The discursive tropes embedded in the rest of the Declaration reaffirms the ideals that have become powerful incantations. The power of the incantation lies in its repetition, and the repetition makes it possible to focus on the incantation itself. One incantation goes to methodology, the way in which they will "work on" the belligerent parties: "we will implement this agreement in a manner that ensures peace, security, stability, and opportunity for all peoples of the region, including both Palestinians and Israelis." Another is offered up as a sort of Credo with  undefined contextual application--as the parties see it: "that lasting peace will be one in which both Palestinians and Israelis can prosper with their fundamental human rights protected, their security guaranteed, and their dignity upheld." Yet another suggests the normative dialectic which serves as the glamour through which the incantation manifests their collective power: "meaningful progress emerges through cooperation and sustained dialogue, and that strengthening bonds among nations and peoples serves the enduring interests of regional and global peace and stability." This is not meant as a criticism; it is meant as a warning both about the power of words and the relationship of that power as a function of its ability to bridge context to abstraction. One can always throw words at a challenge; sometimes they have effect; and sometimes that effect is unintended. Incantation is both instrument and the instrument's object. Still,that one is capable of hammering a nail does not suggest that the repetition of this act will produce a house. It will, however produce a certain noise which for some may be the essence of the music of the spheres, a musica universalis of social relations in contested spaces. 

Pix credit here (Goya, El Conjuro 1797)

4. Ambiguity as the Elixir of Power. Virtually all of the words and concepts, all of the ideals expressed--and so nicely expressed, in the document, are and have been highly contested and assume quite distinct meanings  depending on who is reading them against what germinal set of rationalizing conception premises. While incantation is power; that power once cantilated may simultaneously produce quite distinct visions among  the community of the incantation faithful. But that is an old story and the essence of the rituals of cease fire. Incantations are meant to be received in deeply personal ways, at the same time they provide the performative cover that makes cease fire possible and peace impossible. One paragraph of the Declaration stands out in this respect:

 We recognize the deep historical and spiritual significance of this region to the faith communities whose roots are intertwined with the land of the region — Christianity, Islam, and Judaism among them. Respect for these sacred connections and the protection of their heritage sites shall remain paramount in our commitment to peaceful coexistence.

5. Are you a Good Witch or a Bad Witch? There is nothing but good intention in the Declaration; that good intention, in turn, elaborates core values and the premises against which good and evil are identified, measured, and judged. The Declaration's now well worn incantation on radicalism provides an excellent illustration.

Pic credit here

We are united in our determination to dismantle extremism and radicalization in all its forms. No society can flourish when violence and racism is normalized, or when radical ideologies threaten the fabric of civil life. We commit to addressing the conditions that enable extremism and to promoting education, opportunity, and mutual respect as foundations for lasting peace.

All necessary, of course, but also packed with presumptions about the constitution of good and evil, one necessarily (and correctly) grounded in the protection of the values of the stats quo against radical transformation, irrespective of its political, social, or religious trajectories. Stability and the protection of the "now" have always been the central measure threat. The initial response, where such threat manifests as violence, is ceasefire. The longer term response is to eradicate the threat.  But it is precisely here that the incantations of ceasefire transaction lose their power. The commitment to "addressing conditions" and "promoting education, opportunity, and mutual respect as foundations" tell us as much about the failures of the contracting parties or order their own houses within which these radical elements find a home as it says anything about the  resolution of  conditions of radicalism itsef.  Perhaps, at the end of the day, the best one can hope for is enough stability so that violence is reduced to tolerable levels--an airstrike here, a massacre there can be absorbed and covered over with the necessary incantations, spiced with strategic recrimination. The mages of incantation appeared satisfied enough to tolerate that state of affairs for decades. Perhaps the peace referenced in the Declaration also implicitly includes a "manageable violence clause." 

Pix credit here

6. Tomorrow is Another Day. And it is hard to believe that they mean exactly what they say; the Declaration speaks to a particular vision: "We seek tolerance, dignity, and equal opportunity for every person, ensuring this region is a place where all can pursue their aspirations in peace, security, and economic prosperity, regardless of race, faith, or ethnicity." However that is hard to square with the determination to keep Palestine Jew free.  Again, the magic of incantation is that they say precisely what they mean but they do not mean precisely what they say.  None of that matters as long as the recitation of incantation produces the desired result--ceasefire. The Declaration, to its credit expresses not just consciousness of this irony but also a measure of frustration with the performative cage within which its repetition is likely: 

"We acknowledge that the Middle East cannot endure a persistent cycle of prolonged warfare, stalled negotiations, or the fragmentary, incomplete, or selective application of successfully negotiated terms.  The tragedies witnessed over the past two years must serve as an urgent reminder that future generations deserve better than the failures of the past."

Connected to this is the obligatory aspiration to "lasting peace", the avoidance of prolonged war,  and the usual suspects of the unattainable under current conditions the causes and transformation of which is only anemically encountered (though even that is a step forward): "tolerance, dignity, and equal opportunity for every person, ensuring this region is a place where all can pursue their aspirations in peace, security, and economic prosperity, regardless of race, faith, or ethnicity." But these are aspirations for tomorrow; the war has ended, it is time to return to one's home and plot within the parameters of new circumstances. In a world of half measures and an abhorrence of the end of things, this is the best that good can expect in the face of its nemesis, which is legion (Mark 5:8).

Pix credit here

7. The Commitments. Aspirations are good; the aspiration to cobble together a world  marked by an absence of organized violence even better. Nonetheless, the performative tropes  around these good intentions remain substantially unchanged from those of the last century. And they are marked by an unwillingness to devote as much attention to the normative disjunctions that sustain violence as they are to the transactional context in which violence can be reduced to a periodic and manageable level in the name of something greater--some sort of lasting peace beneath which conflict can take more acceptable forms and the destruction of one's enemies can be undertaken with less fuss. That was the "cold war" model--one can actually talk ones enemy to death--where talking is enhanced by strategic deployments of activity that transform violence into campaigns of destabilization, delegitimization, and micro-aggression that allows attrition to do its work. 

 "In this spirit, we welcome the progress achieved in establishing comprehensive and durable peace arrangements in the Gaza Strip, as well as the friendly and mutually beneficial relationship between Israel and its regional neighbors. We pledge to work collectively to implement and sustain this legacy, building institutional foundations upon which future generations may thrive together in peace."

Perhaps that is the best one can do in this stage of global historical development. This is a passage worthy of song. We have done worse. Indeed, none of this is to suggest that the Declaration or its sentiments and normative aspirations are wrong or wrongheaded, or that transactions in cease fire are foolish or bad.  Quite the opposite; yet it is also useful to approach all of this conjuring with a certain humility and a commitment to the attainable for as long as attainment is possible. For that all parties are to be congratulated.

 

Pix credit here

The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity

Presidential Memoranda

October 13, 2025

We, the undersigned, welcome the truly historic commitment and implementation by all parties to the Trump Peace Agreement, ending more than two years of profound suffering and loss — opening a new chapter for the region defined by hope, security, and a shared vision for peace and prosperity.

We support and stand behind President Trump’s sincere efforts to end the war in Gaza and bring lasting peace to the Middle East.  Together, we will implement this agreement in a manner that ensures peace, security, stability, and opportunity for all peoples of the region, including both Palestinians and Israelis.

We understand that lasting peace will be one in which both Palestinians and Israelis can prosper with their fundamental human rights protected, their security guaranteed, and their dignity upheld. 

We affirm that meaningful progress emerges through cooperation and sustained dialogue, and that strengthening bonds among nations and peoples serves the enduring interests of regional and global peace and stability.

We recognize the deep historical and spiritual significance of this region to the faith communities whose roots are intertwined with the land of the region — Christianity, Islam, and Judaism among them.  Respect for these sacred connections and the protection of their heritage sites shall remain paramount in our commitment to peaceful coexistence.

We are united in our determination to dismantle extremism and radicalization in all its forms.  No society can flourish when violence and racism is normalized, or when radical ideologies threaten the fabric of civil life.  We commit to addressing the conditions that enable extremism and to promoting education, opportunity, and mutual respect as foundations for lasting peace.

We hereby commit to the resolution of future disputes through diplomatic engagement and negotiation rather than through force or protracted conflict.  We acknowledge that the Middle East cannot endure a persistent cycle of prolonged warfare, stalled negotiations, or the fragmentary, incomplete, or selective application of successfully negotiated terms.  The tragedies witnessed over the past two years must serve as an urgent reminder that future generations deserve better than the failures of the past.

We seek tolerance, dignity, and equal opportunity for every person, ensuring this region is a place where all can pursue their aspirations in peace, security, and economic prosperity, regardless of race, faith, or ethnicity.

We pursue a comprehensive vision of peace, security, and shared prosperity in the region, grounded in the principles of mutual respect and shared destiny.

In this spirit, we welcome the progress achieved in establishing comprehensive and durable peace arrangements in the Gaza Strip, as well as the friendly and mutually beneficial relationship between Israel and its regional neighbors.  We pledge to work collectively to implement and sustain this legacy, building institutional foundations upon which future generations may thrive together in peace.

We commit ourselves to a future of enduring peace.

Donald J. Trump

President of the United States of America

Abdel Fattah El-Sisi

President of the Arab Republic of Egypt

Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani  

Emir of the State of Qatar

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

President of the Republic of Türkiye