Is This Gaza Thing A Bluff, or What?

Hello! In an age of news fatigue I still believe in the power of journalism. I got a journalism degree back in the day, and even "practiced" the "profession." That is, until I had my first proper nervous breakdown. I also realize you are...over...picking up a newspaper, so here's the deal. Every morning I go and buy a paper copy of the New York Times. I read it. Then, I pick a story on the front page and explain it to you like you're clever. Cool? Let's give it a go...and thank you for indulging me. 

—Matt Davis, who reads the newspaper so you don’t have to.

Today's New York Times led with President Donald Trump's "proposal" for Gaza. It's "rattling the Middle East," say the headlines on the front page I've read on your behalf (you get how this works, now, right?).

On Monday night, Trump said he wanted the U.S. to "take over" Gaza, and "we'll do a job on it, too." The Timesdispatched its reporters to find out whether there was more detail. The answer is a series of variations of the word "nope." 

"While his announcement looked formal and thought-out—he read the plan from a sheet of paper—his administration had not done even the most basic planning to examine the feasibility of the idea," write Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman. 

The old "reading the plan from a sheet of paper" trick, eh? It's one I must practice more often, like getting ChatGPT to prepare agendas for meetings. Or using a PowerPoint when you want people over 50 to take your word for something. I'm glad we have reporters around to see through this iron-clad level of making-stuff-up!

Jerusalem-based reporter Patrick Kingsley also rounded up a group of experts who "ask if he is serious or bluffing." The consensus, Kingsley appears to believe, based on his reporting, is that the thing read from the piece of paper "was simply the opening bid in a new round of negotiations over Gaza's future." Views of the proposal range from "comical" to "important," Kingsley reports. 

"While Mr. Trump portrayed the idea as a kindness to Palestinians living in a devastated territory, legal experts said that forced dpeortation would be a crime against humanity," Kingsley wrote. 

Ah, "a crime against humanity." Read off from a piece of paper. Er. 

My sense, for what it's worth, is that there'll be another one of these suggestions along in a minute. Meanwhile the world is doing its best to half ignore what the President of the U.S. said, in the hopes that he didn't mean it. That's not great for the stability of the nation, the Middle East, or the world. But it's the Super Bowl this weekend and the stock market is up.

You're welcome!

Matt

Matt Davis lives in New York with his wife and child. Contact him here.