In the complex landscape of international diplomacy, President Donald Trump’s strategic approach to conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine emphasizes giving the stronger party what it wants while pressuring the weaker party to accept terms. This transactional diplomacy style, often viewed as realpolitik, prioritizes quick wins and deals over the arduous work of conflict resolution.

Trump’s actions have included offering concessions to Russian President Vladimir Putin and pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for mineral wealth sharing without formal security guarantees. In the Middle East, Trump’s support for Israel and aggressive stance towards Hamas have raised questions about the long-term vision for peace in the region, particularly regarding a two-state solution.

Despite Trump’s forceful tactics, both Ukraine and Hamas have remained defiant, seeking support from allies and resisting Trump’s ultimatums. The historical context of military power and conflicts, including the ongoing struggles in the Middle East, demonstrate that military might does not always guarantee victory.

Comparisons to past conflicts, like the Melian Dialogue from ancient Athens, highlight the challenges of using power to dictate outcomes. Successful diplomatic efforts, such as the Camp David peace agreement and the Good Friday Agreement, have shown that an even-handed approach and recognition of mutually hurting stalemates can lead to lasting peace.

While Trump’s unconventional strategies in the Middle East have resulted in some diplomatic successes, concerns remain about the exclusion of key stakeholders and the potential for long-term peace. The ongoing conflicts underscore the complexities of international relations and the importance of balanced diplomacy in achieving lasting solutions.