Vindicated: Trump’s Bold Plan Ignites the Middle East’s Long-Awaited Dawn

Nearly two years ago, in the shadow of Hamas’s barbaric October 7, 2023, assault, I wrote about the unexpected opportunity emerging from that horror. Then, in June of this year, I described a turning point, Israel’s decisive actions against Iran and its proxies that I believed would realign the region. Those posts, offered a prediction: that Iran’s overreach would ultimately collapse its influence, strengthen the Abraham Accords, and open a path toward durable regional peace. What then was hope and optimism is now becoming history and I am profoundly grateful.

The Plan That Changed the Game

President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan to end the Gaza War has redefined Middle East diplomacy. Its first phase, securing the release of hostages, a ceasefire, and initial withdrawal, and release of some Israeli held prisoners, has been signed by both Israel and Hamas, with implementation imminent.

From Riyadh to Islamabad, world leaders have hailed Trump’s blueprint as a “bold vision for peace,” combining humanitarian relief, demilitarization, and post-war governance.

This isn’t a symbolic gesture, it’s a structural shift. Hamas is militarily broken, Iran’s proxies are neutralized, Iran is on its heals, and the Abraham Accords are expanding. The cycle of perpetual war is giving way to a framework of mutual security and economic growth.

Trump’s success in the Middle East stems not only from strength, but from fairness. He is trusted precisely because he has acted as a credible, even-handed broker, something few American presidents have achieved. Israel remains America’s steadfast ally, but Trump made clear to Prime Minister Netanyahu that there would be no annexation of the West Bank, preserving space for Palestinian self-governance. When Israeli operatives overstepped in their failed strike on Hamas leadership in Doha, Trump insisted Netanyahu issue a formal apology to Qatar, signaling that even allies must respect the rules of peace. That balance, firm loyalty to Israel paired with accountability and respect for Arab sovereignty, has earned him rare trust across the region. Leaders from Saudi Arabia to Jordan to Egypt view Trump as a negotiator who honors strength, keeps his word, and delivers results.

From Despair to Leverage

When Hamas struck in 2023, I argued that it was Iran’s desperate gambit, a last-ditch attempt to derail the Abraham Accords. Tehran’s Revolutionary Guards had poured some $700 million into Hamas that year, hoping to ignite chaos and halt normalization between Israel and the Arab world. Instead, it exposed Iran’s hand and unified moderate Arab states around a shared enemy.

By June 2025, as Israel’s Operation Rising Lion obliterated Iran’s nuclear sites and air defenses, the dominoes began to fall: Hamas shattered in Gaza, Hezbollah blunted in Lebanon, the Houthis isolated in Yemen. Trump’s strategic 60-day window for Iranian compliance, followed by Israeli action, proved once again that strength, not appeasement, compels peace.

Now, with the 20-point plan, the final act is unfolding. This is not another Oslo illusion—it’s a pragmatic roadmap that replaces idealism with enforceable peace.

The End of an Era of Illusions

For decades, conventional U.S. policy produced only funerals. From the Oslo Accords to the Obama and Biden-era attempts at détente with Tehran, America’s political class traded strength for symbolism. The result was predictable: Iran grew bolder, its proxies bloodier, and its ideology more entrenched.

Trump reversed the formula. He built personal and economic ties first through the Abraham Accords, applied maximum pressure to Iran, and let Israel lead militarily while he forged regional unity.

His visits to Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and Doha this summer transformed what once seemed a fragile coalition into a genuine peace axis. Hamas’s capitulation is the consequence of that realignment, a peace built on strength, not sentimentality.

The Challenges Ahead

No transformation comes without friction. Hamas’s remnants may seek to preserve influence through politics or protest. Negotiations over Gaza’s post-war governance will test all parties, and Iran, battered but not dead, may lash out through cyber or covert means. Yet the regional momentum is unmistakable. With Saudi Arabia poised to formalize ties with Israel and Iran increasingly isolated, the architecture of peace is taking shape. The theocrats of Tehran and their proxy warlords bet on fear and division. They are losing to partnership and prosperity.

Beyond the Battlefield

This victory reaches beyond geopolitics. It exposes the moral bankruptcy of the West’s intersectional ideology, one that glorified Hamas as “resistance” while ignoring its Iranian masters. On college campuses, chants of “From the river to the sea” became the rallying cry of useful fools, those who confused liberation with annihilation. Trump’s success shatters that lie.

True peace does not come from protest slogans or moral posturing, it comes from confronting evil and defeating it. The loss of innocent life in Israel and Gaza was heartbreaking, but those who cry for peace without understanding the nature of the conflict forget that inaction can cause even greater suffering. Evil must be confronted, not appeased. The civilian deaths in Gaza were tragic, but they were not genocide, they were the unavoidable cost of dismantling a terrorist regime that used its own people as shields. If their deaths lead to the final end of this endless cycle of war, they will not have been in vain.

To my progressive friends who took to the streets in outrage, I say this sincerely: your compassion is admirable, but compassion without understanding is dangerous. Many of you were moved by images of suffering yet unaware of the history, manipulation, and deceit behind them. You were misled into defending those who despise the very freedoms you cherish. It is time for honest reflection, for empathy guided by truth, not emotion. Only then can compassion serve peace instead of prolonging war.

A Fulfillment Foretold

Two years ago, I closed my essay with the words of Jesus: “Blessed are the peacemakers.” That blessing now takes form. For all his disruptiveness, Donald Trump has proven to be the peacemaker his critics said could never exist, redrawing the Middle East’s map without a single American soldier on the ground.

The opportunity I glimpsed after Gaza’s horrors and the turning point I heralded amid Iran’s fall have merged into a single truth: the dawn of a new Middle East is upon us. May we nurture it together with courage and clarity.

Related Posts

The Opportunity After the Gaza War - November 2023
Predicted that Hamas’s October 7 attack would expose Iran’s hand and create an opening for a new regional alignment built on the Abraham Accords.

From Ivy Halls: The Collapse of Moral Clarity and Truth on College Campuses - June 2025
Criticized American universities, especially elite institutions, that have nurtured a radical worldview that rebranded Marxist ideology through the lens of identity and justice that leaves students radicalized.

A Turning Point in the Middle East - June 2025
Explored how Israel’s strikes on Iran and Trump’s renewed diplomacy were setting the stage for the most significant transformation in the region since Camp David.

------

SHARING: Please consider sharing these blog posts via social media or email if you find them interesting by providing a link to either https://www.libertytakeseffort.com or https://libertytakeseffort.substack.com

DISTRIBUTION: Liberty Takes Effort shifted its distribution from social media to email delivery via Substack as a Newsletter. If you would like to receive distribution, please email me at libertytakeseffort@gmail.com. To see archived blog posts since 2014, visit www.libertytakeseffort.com.

DISCLAIMER: The entire content of this website and newsletter are based solely upon the opinions and thoughts of the author unless otherwise noted. It is not considered advice for action by readers in any realm of human activity. Its purpose is to stimulate discussion on topics of interest to readers to further inform the public square. Use of any information on this site is at the sole choice and risk of the reader.

An Open Letter on the Dignity Act of 2025: A Bipartisan Start

To Representatives María Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Veronica Escobar (D-TX), and all Americans:

In a time of partisan deadlock, your Dignity Act of 2025 (H.R. 4393) shows promise through bipartisan backing, including eleven Republicans and eleven Democrats. However, it risks failure because it repeats previous mistakes. As a commentator who recently completed a four-part series on immigration reform, I recommend that you focus on framing your bill strategically, prioritizing overhaul of the 1965 Immigration Act, and enforcement and reform of immigration related policies before legalization.

Where the Act Gets It Right

Your bill’s enforcement measures are robust. A $46.5 billion investment in barriers, technology, and ports of entry, along with 24/7 aerial surveillance and harsher penalties for smugglers and repeat offenders, demonstrates genuine seriousness. The phased rollout of mandatory E-Verify is vital. These measures echo my call for “relentless enforcement” at the border and in the interior as the non-negotiable precondition for any agreement.

Your asylum reforms are equally important. Humanitarian camps to process claims within 60 days, penalties for fraud, and regional processing centers abroad are practical steps to prevent abuse of the asylum system. If executed correctly, as part of broader reforms, these changes could help close the “catch and release” loophole and restore trust in our asylum laws.

I also see value in the Dignity Act’s restitution requirements. Requiring undocumented immigrants to pay $7,000 over seven years, undergo biometrics, check in regularly, and remain ineligible for federal benefits acknowledges that legalization must be earned, not handed out. These elements closely align with the Temporary Guest Resident and Special Legal Permanent Resident models I have proposed.

Gerrymandering: The One Thing Democrats and Republicans Agree On

Gerrymandering is once again in the news. I first wrote about it in 2019, but since then what was once an occasional tactic has turned into a high-stakes battleground in the fight for power. In this post, I suggest one way to control the worst gerrymanders — by empowering federal courts to strike down maps that are grossly disproportionate.

In Texas, Republicans redrew maps to improve their chances in 2026, prompting Democrats to denounce the move as an attack on democracy. Meanwhile, in California, Governor Gavin Newsom aims to expand a heavily Democratic-leaning delegation, where a 22.3% distortion favoring Democrats, combined with the state’s 52-seat delegation, creates one of the most significant imbalances in the nation.

Gerrymandering has been a feature of American politics since the founding of the Republic and has long been a staple of the country's political landscape. In recent decades, however, the practice has become more advanced, more coordinated nationwide, and more central to partisan conflicts. Additionally, technology enables precise manipulation, and national leaders are now investing directly in state-level races.

Immigration Reform Part 4: From Strategy to Action

For decades, Washington has traded promises of border security “tomorrow” for leniency “today.” In Reagan’s 1986 Act, legalization proceeded, but enforcement never followed. Americans now understand that promises alone do not secure borders—only laws, resources, and tangible results do. This plan changes that history by first rebuilding laws, institutions, and enforcement, while registering illegal immigrants only after legislative changes are put in place. Legalization will only begin once the new system has demonstrated its effectiveness.

A Demographic Reality We Can’t Ignore

America faces a fertility crisis. Our fertility rate, at 1.6 compared to the 2.1 needed for stability, risks a 25% population decline by 2085, resulting in a drop from 334 million to 251 million. This would shrink the workforce and decrease economic output. Unless fertility rates rise significantly, immigration will be the most effective way to stabilize the population, requiring 2.5–3 million legal immigrants annually.

But immigration alone is not a solution. The economy of the 21st century will be shaped by automation, robotics, and artificial intelligence, which will boost productivity and decrease the need for certain types of labor while increasing demand for others. This means immigration must be managed carefully, not just in terms of volume, but also in terms of composition, balancing birth rates, economic needs, and technological progress. When done correctly, immigration can offer both stability and flexibility during times of demographic decline and rapid change.

Immigration Reform Part 3: The Strategic Imperitive

In Part 2 of this four-part series, we looked at how decades of broken promises, political gamesmanship, and misplaced compassion pushed America’s immigration system to the brink. But simply pointing out failures isn’t enough. If we want to restore order, public trust, and fairness, we must go beyond slogans and quick fixes. We need a strategy, a clear and practical framework that explains not just how we handle immigration, but why.

This strategy must support America’s security, economic, and cultural interests while allowing room for responsible compassion. Only then can we provide a humane and disciplined path forward that gains the confidence of the American people.

Tactics Are Not Strategy

The Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz said war is “politics by other means.” Tactics, he argued, are useless without a clear purpose. Immigration policy is no different. Deportations, walls, visa limits, or legalization are tools, not solutions.

Some advocate for mass deportation as the answer. Others support open borders, citing compassion as their reason. Both overlook the main issue: what kind of society are we building, and how does immigration help us get there? Open-border advocates argue that compassion and global humanitarian duties take precedence over national interests, but no country can thrive with unlimited generosity. Mass deportation alone ignores the need for legal paths and economic factors. Without a shared vision based on our nation’s needs, economic growth, cultural unity, and security, we end up with reactive enforcement, unpredictable policies, and a growing gap between what the public expects and what the system actually delivers.

How Immigration Policy Lost Its Way

The United States is an idea built on liberty, responsibility, and unity. However, recent immigration policies have shifted away from these principles, often driven by sentiment, corporate interests, or political gain. Corporate lobbies push for cheap labor. Activists promote demographic change. Politicians modify rules to sway elections. What’s missing is a plan to align immigration policies with America’s long-term interests.

A firm immigration policy starts with clear questions: Who can support our economic interests? How do we bring them in legally and sustainably? How do we ensure they assimilate and follow our laws? These questions focus on the nation’s interests rather than short-term gestures or ideological victories.

Progressives often quote the Statue of Liberty’s poem, “Give me your tired, your poor…,” as if it’s law. But the Statue, a gift from France, celebrated liberty, not open borders. Emma Lazarus’s poem was a later addition, expressing sentiment rather than a strategy.

Historically, immigration met America’s needs. In the 19th century, immigrants were pioneers settling the frontier to support the nation’s expansion. During industrialization, another wave of immigrants contributed to the growth of factories and the economy. Most came from Europe, sharing cultural roots that eased assimilation. They worked to adopt American values despite facing challenges like discrimination.

Immigration Reform Part 2: Why We Keep Failing—and What It Will Take to Succeed

A bipartisan opportunity for meaningful immigration reform may finally be on the horizon, but only if both sides are willing to reflect on how we arrived at this point. This post continues from Part 1 by exploring the political, legal, and cultural choices, on both the left and the right, that have contributed to today’s immigration crisis. For decades, partisan agendas, broken promises, and misplaced priorities have shaped a system that pleases no one and fails everyone. While millions remain in legal limbo and needed systemic change is ignored, political leaders cling to slogans instead of solutions. By tracing the history of immigration policy from the 1986 amnesty to today’s dysfunction, we can begin to understand why real reform has been so challenging and what kind of consensus will be necessary to move forward.

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, a comprehensive law that provided legal status and a path to citizenship for nearly 3 million illegal immigrants. It was a significant compromise: amnesty in exchange for more vigorous border enforcement. However, only part of that agreement was fulfilled. Legalization occurred, but enforcement did not.

President Ronald Reagan signing the Immigration Reformand Control Act, 1986.  He said during his comments: "Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our effort to humanely regain control of our border and to thereby preserve the value of the most sacred possession of our people, American citizenship."

That broken promise shaped the decades that followed. It hardened Republican skepticism, encouraged more illegal migration, and eroded public trust in the government’s ability to manage immigration. Nearly 40 years later, the failure of that deal still casts a long shadow over every attempt at reform.

Immigration Reform Part 1: Necessary and Possible

The immigration issues facing the United States are vast. President Donald Trump might be the only president since Ronald Reagan with both the opportunity and the political will to tackle them thoroughly. However, achieving this will require something rare in today's political climate: both sides of the aisle opening their eyes and reaching a compromise to develop a comprehensive immigration plan.

Trump is not a traditional conservative. Nor is he a doctrinaire populist. He is a pragmatist, a president whose instinct is to solve problems rather than adhere to dogma. That is why he can pivot, adjust, and make deals in ways that confound both his enemies and his allies.

Already, there is grumbling within his coalition that he might shift from a “deport everyone” stance toward a solution that includes some form of legalization for people illegally in the United States who meet specific criteria. Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, recently warned his followers that wealthy donors and political insiders are pressuring Trump to ease off mass deportation rhetoric.