Behind the praise and compliments that U.S. President Donald Trump publicly showered on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their summit at Mar-a-Lago in Florida (Trump’s private resort), lies an American desire to secure certain concessions from Israel, at least enough to keep the Gaza plan alive and prevent the impression that everything is collapsing.

As an added gesture of honor, Netanyahu was among the invitees to the New Year’s Eve party hosted by Trump on Wednesday night at Mar-a-Lago. Most U.S. assessments indicated that Trump was determined to announce the “Peace Council” he would chair and to begin forming a stabilization force and a technocratic committee to administer Gaza in early January. These steps would require cooperation from the Israeli side and an end to entrenchment behind demands such as the return of the last bodies of Israeli soldiers captured by Hamas on October 7, 2023 (the date of Hamas’s attack on Israel), or the disarmament of the movement as a precondition for moving to the second phase, bearing in mind that the provisions of the U.S. plan stipulate disarmament in that second phase.

From Trump’s remarks about giving the movement a “brief period” to give up its weapons, it can be inferred that the White House is still betting on a role for Egypt, Turkey, and Qatar in reaching a formula with Hamas regarding the issue of arms. Trump’s praise of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is not gratuitous. Likewise, the U.S. pressure exerted on Israel to approve the recent $35 billion gas deal with Egypt was also not without purpose.

What the U.S. is asking of Netanyahu is to wait a little and not resume the war immediately upon his return from the United States, in a move that could threaten to undo what Trump considers his most significant achievement during the first year of his second term. In this context, the newspaper Israel Hayom (a major Israeli daily) reported that Trump and Netanyahu agreed at the Florida summit on setting a two-month deadline for Hamas to give up its weapons, a period deemed sufficient for mediators to exert their influence on the movement.

A U.S. official told The Times of Israel (an English-language Israeli news outlet) that Washington expects Netanyahu, after his return from the United States, to open the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt in both directions. This step is stipulated in the first phase of the U.S. plan, but Israel has not implemented it, citing what it describes as Hamas’s failure to honor its commitments regarding the return of all the bodies of Israeli captives.

Netanyahu, returning from the United States with strong momentum, will also begin focusing on the election campaign and will seek to capitalize on the political backing provided by Trump to boost his approval ratings. While polls show an improvement in Likud’s popularity, there is still no guarantee that it will be able to form a government again. For this reason, Netanyahu is in strong need of Trump and will not risk decisions that could provoke his displeasure.

The Washington Post reports, quoting Gayil Talshir, a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Israel’s leading public university), that Netanyahu “will conduct polls over the weekend, and if the indicator moves even slightly, I think he will activate the election option… He will not find a better launching point than this.”

The central question still being raised is what Trump will receive in return for his public support of Netanyahu. This was also noted by Haaretz columnist Yossi Verter (Haaretz is a leading Israeli daily), who said that “excessive courtesies come at a price.”

For Trump, it would be sufficient that Netanyahu refrains from taking steps that would completely undermine the U.S. plan and return everyone to square one, reducing the number of wars the U.S. president boasts of having stopped from eight to seven, and further diminishing his chances of winning the Nobel Peace Prize this year. The “Israel Prize” (Israel’s highest civilian honor), which Netanyahu awarded to the U.S. president, would not constitute compensation.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar