The Two US Envoys: Witkoff, Barrack, and who failed to understand Netanyahu’s Game

By Elijah J. Magnier –

In the endless churn of Middle Eastern diplomacy, presidential envoys come and go. Some last a few months, some only a few trips. Rarely do they leave a mark that is remembered beyond the inside corridors of Washington or the chancelleries of Beirut or Tel Aviv. Yet two recent US envoys — Steve Witkoff and Thomas Barrack — stand as striking contrasts. Both were tasked with navigating the minefield of Benjamin Netanyahu’s politics on two different fronts. Both claimed to be mediating on behalf of Washington. But only one has grasped, and even enabled, Netanyahu’s survival game. The other has stumbled, believing diplomacy could be practiced in good faith with the illusive and liar Israel’s prime minister, as described by his closest allies in the government, finance minister Bezalel Smotrich.

Witkoff remains in the game because he has internalised the logic of Netanyahu’s rule: proposals are not meant to resolve conflicts but to perpetuate them. Barrack, by contrast, believed that words on paper could bind Israel to concessions and that Israeli proposed agreements signed in Beirut would translate into commitments in Tel Aviv. That illusion cost him his credibility and, ultimately, will cost him his mission.

Witkoff’s Method: Forwarding and Blaming

Steve Witkoff has become emblematic of a certain kind of Trump-era envoy: brash, transactional, and utterly indifferent to the optics of fairness. His approach to Hamas–Israel negotiations reflects this simplicity. He takes an Israeli plan — drafted in Netanyahu’s office, vetted by his advisers — and channels it through Qatar and Egypt, the two indispensable mediators with leverage over Hamas.