Gaza and Ukraine: The Future of Coercive Diplomacy?
On Sept. 29, U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu jointly announced a ceasefire, stopping the two-year old Gaza conflict, at least for a time.
As Hamas returned the final hostages to Israel, Trump claimed the United States’ June 2025 strike against Iran’s nuclear program was the impetus for the deal, stating, “it really started when we took out the nuclear capability of Iran.”
The authors have previously argued in these pages that the U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities were the first salvos in a process eventually culminating in peace negotiations between the United States, Israel, and Iran. Such talks should be underpinned by a commitment to coercive diplomacy. By demonstrating a willingness to hurt an enemy, generating a fear of unacceptable escalation, and creating inherent bargaining power, President Trump was able to use coercive diplomacy to potentially end the Gaza conflict.
True to a commitment to coercive diplomacy principles, Trump followed the successful “Midnight Hammer” operation with increasingly aggressive rhetoric toward Iran’s proxy partner, Hamas, that created a sense of urgency for the militant group to negotiate an end to the conflict. On Oct. 3, Trump gave Hamas 48 hours to accept his proposed peace agreement, while affirming Israel’s right to continue its offensive if Hamas rejected the deal. The next day, President Trump increased the pressure by warning Hamas would face “complete obliteration” if it did not agree to a ceasefire deal.
What does the success of Trump’s coercive tactics mean for future U.S. foreign policy decisions? The question is especially relevant to another vexing foreign policy issue: the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.
Like the Gaza conflict, all attempts to negotiate a peaceful ending to the war in Ukraine have failed. Despite his forces suffering more than 1 million casualties and his country facing significant economic challenges, Russian President Vladimir Putin has steadfastly refused to abandon his military campaign against Ukraine. To break the stalemate, President Trump may have to force him to the negotiating table through coercive diplomacy.
For years, the United States has slowly increased its weapons transfers to Ukraine, and during each stage, Putin warned of the dire consequences of this “escalation.” Now Trump is considering sending Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine. Putin claims such a move would lead to “the destruction of Moscow’s relationship with Washington.”
The Tomahawk is a subsonic missile with a 1,000-pound warhead. The U.S. primarily uses these missiles to attack high-value, heavily defended targets on land. With a range of up to 2,500 kilometers, the weapon can reach targets inside Russia including airfields and defense industry sites, possibly swinging the conflict in Ukraine’s favor.
In addition to providing Ukraine with a formidable weapon system, Trump called Russia a “paper tiger” that “has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a war that should have taken a real military power less than a week to win.”
Despite speculation that this statement represents a change in U.S. policy toward Ukraine, a more accurate assessment is that the president is pursuing a coercive diplomatic tactic to increase negotiation leverage. An administration official succinctly captured the approach by (rhetorically) asking, “Why would he give up that leverage? He won’t remove the threat until it’s no longer necessary.”
President Trump’s threat seemed to have secured a follow-on meeting with Putin in Budapest in the coming weeks, but that now appears to have been canceled after follow-on negotiations. But after the successful use of coercive diplomacy to achieve the Gaza ceasefire agreement, Trump needs to maintain pressure on Russia. This is crucial if the United States wishes to bring about a realistic peace dialogue regarding the Ukraine war.
For example, the U.S. could continue to support Ukraine’s devastating attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure. On the other hand, Trump could take a more conservative approach to provide room for negotiations. He reportedly rejected Ukraine’s request for Tomahawk missiles at a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, at least for now. Describing the weapons as a “big deal,” President Trump said that “the threat of that [the missiles] is good, but the threat of that is always there.”
Tomahawk missiles don’t appear to be Trump’s only effort at coercive diplomacy. In an attempt to squeeze Russia economically, the Trump administration has threatened massive tariffs on Indian goods if that country does not stop buying Russian oil.
Although a reduction in Russian oil exports to India won’t happen overnight, any reduction would force Russia to find new markets or sell oil at bigger discounts, which could negatively affect its already struggling wartime economy.
What Happens Next?
In sum, Trump’s gambit in Gaza might succeed—especially in the short term. The longer-term horizon seems murky, as events in the Middle East seldom proceed in a linear, predictable pattern. But President Trump’s apparent success with coercive diplomacy could embolden his foreign policy decisions.
Assuming the administration doesn’t want direct involvement in the Ukraine conflict, now is the time to follow a coercive diplomatic playbook to possibly secure a peace in the largest and deadliest European land war since World War II.
About the Authors:
Joe Swiecki and Jim Cook are Professors of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval War College. The views expressed here are solely those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views, policies, or positions of the US Government, US Department of Defense or its components, including the Department of the Navy or the U.S. Naval War College.
Jim
November 2, 2025 at 3:02 pm
What can be done with Hamas, a para-military, terrorist organization heavily outgunned by the opposing force and greatly reduced after nearly two years of lopsided war, where the choice was stark, agree to a cease fire or suffer total destruction, is not analogous to the situation in the Ukraine war.
Russia is not Hamas.
Attempting to use the same template as the Hamas cease fire promises to escalate the conflict.
It also greatly overestimates the ability of the U. S. to dictate terms to Russia.
Isn’t that what Biden’s sanction policy was about: forcing Russia to withdraw from Ukraine due to systemic, economic collapse and the resultant political crisis in the Russian polity? Plus, once that failed, repeatedly crossing self-imposed ‘red lines’ regarding various weapons systems looking for a “wonder” weapon which would tilt the balance of forces Ukraine’s way.
True, Biden’s policy didn’t depend on diplomacy, just the presumed power of sanctions to take down Russia’s economy causing political fracture and paralysis, along with sending increasingly sophisticated weapons systems (which failed to tilt the balance in a meaningful way).
Calling escalation, whether economic or military, ‘coercive diplomacy’ obscures what the authors really want: aggressive non-diplomatic actions to achieve a victor’s peace.
That’s not diplomacy… it’s war fighting to achieve what you want.
How far do you want to go?
All the way to a larger European war?
Because following the authors’ advice takes us down the path to a potential Great Power conflict with all the risks & dangers associated with that scale of conflict.
Again, Russia is not Hamas.
It’s misguided to think you can treat Russia the same way as Hamas and think it’s going to be successful.
U. S. efforts haven’t worked so far. What makes the authors think it will work now after three and a half years of previous, failed efforts?
Sounds more like, “more of the same and do it harder.”
That’s just a warmed-up version of what we’ve already been doing. Seems like going into a ‘box canyon’ and hoping to ride out the other side.
bis-biss
November 2, 2025 at 6:56 pm
Trump today appears old and aged, visibly aged, especially during his recent visit to south-east Asia.
His voice sounded slurred, as if on his last legs.
A recent dream I had contained images of very long lines at supermarkets and wholesale outlets, with lots of guards at all entrances.
We are today at the onset of ww3. Thanks to Donny and his cronies.Thanks, Donny ! Thanks, hegseth.
Krystal cane
November 2, 2025 at 9:55 pm
Trump is what happens when syphilis goes unchecked for 50 years
Swamplaw Yankee
November 4, 2025 at 5:54 am
The peer reader is free – up to today – to cruise the sites of “real” op-ed writers. P. O’Brien, Anne Applebaum, Dr. Malone, etc.
A different coat of hair on these cats from the “stilted” op-ed say on some Yankee based sites.
Anne Applebaum published a Kremlin ruuzzkie Putin family album recently, about the Kremlin ruuzzkies favourite vacation spot – “THE GULAG”. There Putins grand pappy send hundreds of millions of Germans, Polish, Rumanian, Ukrainian + countless ethnic groups to mine Uranium ore for the ruuzzkies embezzler nuclear bomb industry.
So, hundreds of millions of ethnics butchered by the Putin Family tree a la Applebaum number counts, what connection has that butchery to the orange scarecrow elite in the White House Ballroom. ( WHB)?
The orange scarecrow elite in the USA has no intention of stopping the current Genocide in and theft of land from UKRAINE. The ruuzzkie shills clearly observe that orange scarecrow head is shakey, as if still daily on the “Craig Ferguson” TV comedy series.
So, what is up with GAZA, Ukraine, the South China Geopolitical land mass, the Turkish East, etc. Is the MSM news (during the pro-sports drug shows) telling the MAGA basic voters what is up in the inner beltway? From the ruuzz-shills above, it seems no way to their reality.
The historians will argue what day exactly in 2025 MAGA POTUS orange scarecrow self-abdicated from being leader of the WEST to just orange scarecrow. Was it when the leader of the WEST, right on the Yankee MSM, told the WEST, thru Zelensky, that he, as the new quizling orange scarecrow, will sell off the soil of ancient Ukraine as he, POTUS, was self-empowering his quizlings to cut a unilateral card deal ( a la Obama) with Kremlin ruuzzkie Putin? Or, does the peer reader have a personal, perhaps, more revealing moment when the defeat of the WEST was suddenly visible as the tangible inner need of the MAGA Cabal around Orange scarecrow?
The peer readers can cringe every day as the orange scarecrow elite dance + throw out press release pumpkins with every square foot of Ukrainian land ( filled with rare earth ores) that the USA POTUS + his armed forces donate to orange scarecrows’ cuddle bun, Kremlin ruuzzkie Putin, open vassal of the PRC CCP Xi regime! Those with clarity of very old age, ‘Are we back in some evil time vortex’? -30-