| Max Boot noted that in the hours after a ceasefire agreement was announced in Gaza, Donald Trump, though not yet inaugurated, was “already taking a victory lap for this deal.” Max noted something else, too: The president-elect was doing so “deservedly.” Max explains, as many have analyzed, that the breakthrough deal came largely because of Trump’s leverage over Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu, leverage he has shown “a willingness to use.” The next steps — actually ending the awful war for good and stabilizing the region more broadly — remain extremely difficult, but diplomat and Middle East expert Dennis Ross writes that Trump is well positioned here, too. Partly, that’s circumstantial; Israel has made unimaginable headway in weakening its neighborhood enemies of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran, aided greatly by the unexpected ouster of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. But peace is not going to progress without Trump applying pressure, Ross writes. He lists two concrete objectives for the incoming president: get Israel to fully withdraw its military from Gaza once hostages are released, and reduce Iran’s nuclear capacity to the point that weapon-making is no longer possible. The second part might come first. Ross says that “if Trump can show he has essentially removed the Iranian threat, much will be possible.” Max is similarly hopeful, writing not-totally-pessimistically about the possibility of a moderate government in Gaza that prevents a Hamas resurgence. Max even dangles the bauble Trump might most covet. In a year’s time, could we be talking about Nobel Peace Prize laureate Donald J. Trump? Chaser: Anyone who wants to get serious about peace in the region should heed outgoing Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s sober address on how difficult that goal is, David Ignatius says. As David writes, “If speeches could bleed, this one would be dripping red.” Greenland, eager for greenbacks As minister of business and trade and mineral resources and justice AND gender equality for the government of Greenland, Naaja Nathanielsen probably has a lot on her plate. But as with Netanyahu, when Trump starts making loud noises about you, you react. In this case, Trump’s covetous eye leads Nathanielsen to clarify that Greenland does not wish to be a part of the United States, thank you very much. However, she says, “we invite more American businesses to engage in the vast potential of our economy” and natural resources (and, presumably, justice and gender equality). Nathanielsen points out that China produces two-thirds of the world’s rare-earth elements; more mining in Greenland could change that, if only more capital arrived. She savvily says, “At the moment, companies in Canada and Britain own the most mining licenses in Greenland. They each hold 23 licenses. The United States holds just one. I am sure this picture can change.” No doubt Trump is sure, too. | 
