In Cairo, Jared Kushner sat across from Hamas leadership — a meeting that most Western governments would refuse to convene — as the Trump administration pursues a comprehensive settlement to one of the world's most enduring conflicts. The deliberate sequencing of talks, engaging the Palestinian militant organization before turning to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, reflects a strategic wager: that direct conversation with all parties, however uncomfortable, is the only path toward a durable peace. Whether this unconventional diplomacy represents a genuine breakthrough or another chapter in a
Kushner Meets Hamas Leaders in Egypt to Advance Trump's Gaza Plan
Direct conversation with Hamas may be necessary to move toward a durable agreement
Mark
Why would the Trump administration choose to engage Hamas directly? Isn't that politically risky?
Mimi
The calculation seems to be that you can't broker a deal without talking to all the parties involved. Hamas controls Gaza and has significant influence over Palestinian public opinion. Ignoring them hasn't produced results in the past.
Mark
But doesn't meeting with them legitimize the organization?
Mimi
That's the tension, yes. The administration appears to have decided that the diplomatic benefit of direct engagement outweighs the political cost of appearing to negotiate with a designated terrorist group.
Mark
What makes Kushner the right person for this?
Mimi
He has existing relationships in the region from the Abraham Accords work, and he operates with the president's full backing. He's not constrained by the usual diplomatic protocols that might limit a State Department official.
Mark
Is there any chance this actually works?
Mimi
The structural problems—Israeli security, Palestinian statehood, settlements—haven't changed. But sometimes a fresh approach and new intermediaries can shift the conversation enough to find movement where there wasn't any before.
Il Polso
- The Trump administration has taken the extraordinary step of opening direct dialogue with Hamas, a group designated as a terrorist organization by both the United States and Israel, signaling a willingness to break diplomatic taboos in pursuit of a Gaza settlement.
- The move creates immediate tension with longstanding Western policy and raises urgent questions about legitimacy, leverage, and what concessions — if any — are being floated behind closed doors.
- Kushner's scheduled follow-on meetings with Netanyahu will test whether positions gathered from Hamas can be translated into terms Israel finds remotely acceptable, with the gap between the two sides described as substantial.
- Regional actors, particularly Egypt, are lending quiet support by hosting the talks, suggesting a broader coalition of interest in seeing the initiative advance even amid deep skepticism.
- The outcome of this diplomatic sprint will determine whether the administration's parallel-track approach produces a breakthrough or simply adds another failed attempt to a decades-long ledger of collapsed negotiations.
In Cairo, Jared Kushner sat across from Hamas leadership — a meeting that most Western governments would refuse to convene — as the Trump administration pursues a comprehensive settlement to one of the world's most enduring conflicts. The deliberate sequencing of talks, engaging the Palestinian militant organization before turning to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, reflects a strategic wager: that direct conversation with all parties, however uncomfortable, is the only path toward a durable peace. Whether this unconventional diplomacy represents a genuine breakthrough or another chapter in a long history of failed negotiations remains the defining question of the weeks ahead.
Jared Kushner traveled to Cairo to meet directly with Hamas leadership, a striking diplomatic move that places the Trump administration in conversation with a Palestinian militant organization most Western governments refuse to engage. The talks, confirmed by officials familiar with the effort, signal the administration's conviction that a comprehensive Gaza settlement requires direct contact with all parties — however fraught that contact may be.
Hamas has controlled Gaza since 2007 and has long resisted peace overtures, but the Trump team appears to believe that fresh intermediaries and unorthodox channels might succeed where previous efforts failed. The specific terms under discussion have not been disclosed, though officials indicate the framework centers on Gaza's future governance, reconstruction, and security arrangements.
The sequencing of Kushner's diplomacy is itself a statement of strategy: engage Hamas first, then turn to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. By testing each side's positions before attempting to bridge them, the administration hopes to arrive at subsequent rounds of talks with a clearer sense of what is possible. Kushner's prior experience brokering the Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab states is cited by the administration as preparation for this more treacherous terrain.
Egypt's willingness to host the meetings lends the initiative at least tacit regional legitimacy, and Cairo's long history as a mediator between Israeli and Palestinian factions makes it a natural venue. Still, the distance between Hamas's stated demands and Israel's security requirements remains wide, and whether Kushner's conversations with Netanyahu will narrow that gap — or reveal it to be unbridgeable — will become clearer in the weeks ahead.
Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and a central figure in the Trump administration's Middle East strategy, traveled to Egypt to meet directly with Hamas leadership. The meetings, confirmed by officials familiar with the diplomatic effort, represent an unusual channel of engagement with the Palestinian militant organization—one that signals the administration's determination to pursue a comprehensive settlement in Gaza through parallel negotiations with both sides of the conflict.
Kushner's presence in Cairo underscores the administration's willingness to engage actors that most Western governments treat as pariahs. Hamas, designated as a terrorist organization by the United States and Israel, has controlled Gaza since 2007 and has resisted previous peace initiatives. Yet the Trump team appears convinced that direct conversation with the group's leadership is necessary to move toward a durable agreement.
The timing of these talks reflects a broader diplomatic push. Kushner is scheduled to meet soon with Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, to discuss the same Gaza framework. This sequencing—engaging Hamas first, then Israel—suggests a strategy of testing positions with each side before attempting to bridge them in subsequent rounds. The administration has not disclosed the specific terms under discussion, but officials have indicated the talks center on a comprehensive plan for Gaza's future governance, reconstruction, and security arrangements.
The diplomatic effort comes against a backdrop of years of conflict and failed negotiations. Previous attempts to resolve the Gaza question have foundered on fundamental disagreements over Palestinian statehood, Israeli security concerns, and the status of settlements. The Trump administration's approach appears to hinge on the belief that new intermediaries and fresh proposals might succeed where earlier efforts did not.
Kushner's role in these negotiations reflects his position as one of the president's most trusted advisors on foreign policy. He has been deeply involved in Middle East diplomacy since the first Trump administration, when he helped broker the Abraham Accords between Israel and several Arab states. That experience, the administration argues, positions him uniquely to navigate the more fraught Israeli-Palestinian dimension.
The meetings in Egypt also signal that regional actors—particularly Egypt, which has long served as a mediator between Israel and Palestinian factions—remain engaged in the search for a settlement. Cairo's willingness to host such talks suggests at least tacit support for the administration's diplomatic initiative, even as questions remain about whether Hamas and Israel can be brought to agreement on fundamental issues.
What emerges from Kushner's conversations with Netanyahu will be closely watched by regional observers and international diplomats. The gap between Hamas's stated positions and Israel's security demands remains substantial. Whether the administration can narrow that gap, or whether these talks represent another cycle in a long pattern of failed negotiations, will become clearer in the weeks ahead.
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su The New York Times ↗
Politics & Governance