Introduction
Israel is in the midst of an invasion of Gaza City, which is a high-density area of the Gaza Strip where 1.2 million people currently live. The civilian casualty rate will be enormous. The remaining Israeli hostages, who are thought to be there, will be at risk; Israeli soldiers will be at risk; and the diplomatic reputation of Israel will suffer, and they will lose allies. Yet, there is a way to stop this invasion in its tracks, even with the finish-Hamas-off demands of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Coalition.
Netanyahu was asked if Israel would still take over Gaza and eliminate the terrorists even if Hamas agrees to a deal.
To that question, Netanyahu answered, "Well, we're going to do that anyway. That was never a question, that we're not going to leave Hamas there. I've said that this war can end today. It can end if Hamas lays down its arms and releases the remaining 50 hostages, at least 20 of which are alive," he added. "That's our goal. To get all the hostages out, to disarm Hamas, demilitarize Gaza and give a different future for Gazans," he said. "My goal is not to occupy Gaza, it's to free Gaza."
Hamas has been badly weakened by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and in the eyes of many Gazans, has seen over 60,000 Gazans needlessly killed in a war started by Hamas's brutal attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Still, many Gazans blame Israel and see their resistance as part of a Jihad (holy war) to get their entire (holy) land back, from the River to the Sea.
I have given up on assigning ultimate blame because it depends on what point in time one starts their causal analysis. But I do want to assign responsibility for bringing peace to that region.
I find it odd that a major party involved in sparking this conflagration is Iran; not by ordering the Oct. 7 attack but by funding and encouraging Hamas to act aggressively towards dismantling Israel. Yet, there is little mention on how Iran can reverse this, stop this war, and bring peace to this region; and at the same time, help their geopolitical aspirations and their own economy.
Hamas Out
Hamas can be demilitarized, and its political, military, and law enforcement leadership can be amicably expelled from Gaza to Iran. To facilitate an end to the Gaza war, seventeen countries, plus the European Union and Arab League, have been calling for the disarmament of Hamas. Disarmament is a welcome start, but a more sure path to peace is, in addition, to facilitate Hamas's political, military, and administrative leadership leaving Gaza to Iran, their main patron and sponsor.
An amicable removal of Hamas is necessary for Hamas to agree to a transfer from Gaza. “Amicable” includes Israeli abstention from revenge violence or incarceration directed at Hamas members, the inclusion of family members in resettlement, and a money stipend to assist with the costs of resettlement in Iran.
Of course, the remaining 50 hostages (20 live and 30 bodies) have to be released prior to or co-terminus with the cessation of warfare. I nominate the U.S., EU, and Abraham Accord countries to monitor Israeli compliance and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar to monitor Hamas compliance. Gaza needs to have a temporary peace-keeping and police presence in Gaza until there can be a transition to a peace-keeping police presence installed by a democratically elected government. One such organization has been recently created that could fulfill the first need and possibly also the second. That organization is the Gaza Transitional Service (GTS) in cooperation with a reformed Palestinian Authority (PA).
Iran Willingness
The rationale for Iran to accept Hamas members into their country is that they: (1) have some sympathy to stop the harm inflicted upon Gazans, (2) can place Hamas members into their military and propaganda infrastructures, and (3) can be economically rewarded through the removal of many of the sanctions placed upon them. For example, sanctions can be removed for purchasing or facilitating the delivery of Iranian oil, unfreezing Iranian governmental assets in the United States and overseas, and allowing the sale of U.S.- origin aircraft or related goods, technology, or services to be sold to Iranian civilian aviation companies. And, (4) perhaps most importantly, so they can be allowed to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes (with monitoring).
Mohammad Javad Zarif, former foreign minister of Iran, recently wrote: "Forging a different future requires vision, courage, and a conscious decision to break free from historical determinism. …The time for a paradigm shift is now."
Remaining Issues Easier to Address
Once Hamas is removed from Gaza to Iran and a transitional Palestinian peaceful governance is created, other issues can be more easily solved—such as the placement of Gazans in Gaza, in the West Bank, and elsewhere during the reconstruction of Gaza (with a right of return), the reduction and reconfiguration of settlements imposed in the West Bank (Iran can make settlement removal from the E1 section of the West Bank part of the Hamas withdrawal deal), and the creation of a Palestinian Province as part of a permanent or temporary Israel-Palestine Confederation (a three state solution). That Confederation would contain the following three provinces: Orthodox Jewish Eretz Yisrael, Traditional Muslim Falasteen, and a Liberal-Pluralistic Judaea-Palestina. All three would be bound by a constitution, which would include a Mideast version of Singapore's Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act.
Living in harmony and peace is an edifice that does not just happen. It must be thoughtfully constructed and nurtured.
Steven Balkin is a professor emeritus at Roosevelt University and a member of the Chicago Political Economy Group. His research focuses on violence prevention, international development, entrepreneurship and cultural preservation. Email: sbalkin@roosevelt.edu
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.