Selective Celebrations Overlook Broken Promises, Escalated Tensions, and a Legacy of Shortsighted Diplomacy
New York, N.Y. — The New York Post’s recent op-ed, How Perverse That the Media Can’t Accept Trump’s Stunning Victory in the Middle East, is a masterclass in cherry-picking.
It hails Donald Trump’s Abraham Accords as a historic triumph while ignoring the broader destabilization his administration fueled in the region. True journalism demands context, not cheerleading. Here’s what the Post won’t tell you.
Who Benefits From This Narrative?
The Post’s framing serves two purposes: rehabilitating Trump’s foreign policy record and reinforcing the myth of liberal media bias. But who actually gained from the Abraham Accords? The deals normalized relations between Israel and a handful of Arab states, but they sidelined Palestinian self-determination, rewarding Benjamin Netanyahu’s expansionist policies while offering no lasting peace framework. The U.A.E. and Bahrain secured arms deals and U.S. favors—hardly altruistic diplomacy.
What the Post Leaves Out
The op-ed ignores Trump’s reckless moves that worsened regional instability:
- Abandoning the Iran Nuclear Deal: The 2018 withdrawal from the JCPOA reignited tensions, leading to Iran accelerating uranium enrichment and proxy conflicts.
- Embracing Authoritarians: From Mohammed bin Salman to Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump cozied up to strongmen, undermining human rights advocacy.
- The “Deal of the Century” Farce: His Middle East peace plan was a one-sided gambit, cementing Israeli settlements and killing two-state solution hopes.
The Accords were less about peace and more about transactional geopolitics—exchanging normalization for U.S. concessions.
When Short-Term Wins Mask Long-Term Risks
The Post celebrates the Accords as irreversible progress. Yet, Trump’s approach ignored underlying tensions:
- Saudi-Israel normalization never materialized, despite Jared Kushner’s boasts.
- Morocco’s recognition came at the cost of U.S. recognition of its Western Sahara claim, undermining international law.
- Sudan’s inclusion was tied to its removal from the terrorism list, a move critics called blackmail.
The Biden administration inherited a region where Iran was more aggressive, Palestinians were more marginalized, and Arab publics largely opposed normalization. That’s not victory—it’s volatile stagnation.
Where the Media’s Real Failure Lies
The Post accuses the media of downplaying Trump’s achievements. But the real failure is the lack of scrutiny over his administration’s Middle East missteps:
- The Assassination of Qasem Soleimani: A reckless escalation that nearly triggered war.
- Moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem: A symbolic win for Netanyahu that inflamed Palestinian unrest.
- Gutting Aid to Palestinians: Cutting UNRWA funding deepened humanitarian crises.
The Post demands praise for Trump while dismissing the consequences of his actions.
Why Truth-Telling Matters More Than Ever
The Anti-Post exists to counter exactly this kind of mythmaking. Trump’s Middle East legacy isn’t one of triumph—it’s a case study in short-term gains sacrificing long-term stability. The Accords were a diplomatic footnote, not a transformation.
If we want real progress, we must demand journalism that prioritizes substance over spin, accountability over adulation. The Post’s version of events isn’t just incomplete—it’s dangerous.
Let this be your act of resistance—not through yelling, but through clarity. Not with conspiracy, but with conscience.
Audio Summary (75 words)
The New York Post’s praise for Trump’s Middle East “victory” ignores his failures: abandoning the Iran deal, emboldening authoritarians, and sidelining Palestinians. The Abraham Accords were transactional, not transformative, and left the region more volatile. True journalism must examine consequences, not just headlines. The Anti-Post counters misleading narratives with facts, exposing the gaps in Trump’s legacy and the media’s complicity in oversimplifying complex diplomacy.
