Trump at the Knesset: The theatre of power and the diplomacy of paradox
- The power of image and the diplomacy of paradox
- Spectacle as the essence of power
- Truth as a rhetorical weapon
- Diplomacy as a continuation of war
- The apogee of a symbolic reign
He initially practised law (1987-1989), specialising in immigration issues, before embarking on a diplomatic career in January 1990.
He was first head of department at the Directorate-General for Foreign Policy for Europe, then director for the Near East at the Deputy Directorate-General for the Middle East, where he followed the Gulf War in particular. After serving as coordinator of sanctions against Iraq at the OECD in October 1990, he was assigned to the Spanish Embassy in Libya (April 1991) and then in Jordan (1993). In 2012, he became Spanish Ambassador to India. Between 1996 and 2008, he also pursued a political career: Director General of the Office of the Minister of the Interior (1996-2000), then Member of Parliament for the Spanish Popular Party (2000-2012).
The power of image and the diplomacy of paradox
There are unwritten laws in politics, telluric forces that govern allegiances. The most immutable is undoubtedly the gravity that draws powers towards the pole of success. Almost everyone likes to associate themselves with the winner, with the notable exception of die-hard enemies, fools and opportunists who, watching which way the wind blows, always end up changing sides.
At a time when European chancelleries – from London to Paris, Brussels to Madrid – are seeking to claim a share of a triumph whose protagonists are nevertheless obvious, it is worth remembering that the United States, under the impetus of Donald Trump's blunt diplomacy, is the true architect of this reconfiguration. It is a success that some still deny out of dogmatism and that many players are now trying to claim as their own.
Once again, Donald Trump has demonstrated that his direct language, innate sense of spectacle and formidable political intuition can be transformed into instruments of formidable diplomatic effectiveness. His historic speech to the Knesset will be remembered not only for its tone and staging, but also for the masterful alchemy with which he combined praise, warning and strategic vision in a single speech. Rarely has a foreign leader uttered such bold words, laden with such symbolism and calculated clarity, at the very heart of the Israeli political reactor.
Spectacle as the essence of power
From the very beginning, Trump has behaved like the archetype of the figure he has patiently crafted. He is the embodiment of what French thinkers such as Guy Debord and Jean Baudrillard might have theorised: a man for whom spectacle is not simply a tool of politics, but politics itself — a simulacrum in which image and reality merge until they become indistinguishable.
Appearing relaxed, yet aware of the gravity of the moment, he measured the profound impact that each of his words would have on the world stage. The striking image of Israeli parliamentarians applauding him fervently, some wearing the iconic red ‘MAGA’ caps, was not mere decorum: it was a visible manifestation of his ability to export a political mythology far beyond his borders.
Truth as a rhetorical weapon
Trump began his speech in a resolutely conciliatory tone, thanking Israel for its courage and determination. However, beneath this layer of adulation lay messages of considerable significance.
In one of the most significant sentences, he urged Israelis to transform their genius:
‘If you put the same ingenuity that you use to defend yourselves into creating, innovating and building, the result would be something unprecedented.’
Such an admonition, uttered from Jerusalem, requires extraordinary political courage. It is much more than advice: it is a challenge to the very identity of a nation built on the imperative of security. As Talleyrand reminded us, ‘man was given speech to disguise his thoughts.’ Trump, on the other hand, reverses the axiom: he uses the most brutal frankness as the most sophisticated of masks, rendering his ultimate intentions completely opaque.
His audacity does not stop there. He praised Qatar and ‘other Arab states’, recognising their role as mediators. The silence that then fell in the chamber was palpable. In doing so, Trump reinforced his status as a global arbiter, the only one capable of bringing irreconcilable parties to the table.
This is where, paradoxically, he joins the Realpolitik tradition of Henry Kissinger, for whom ‘the role of the statesman is to bridge the gap between experience and vision’. Trump, in his own way, bridges this gap through the sheer force of his will and personality.
Diplomacy as a continuation of war
In another key moment, the president extended an unexpected hand to Tehran, stating that ‘America's hand is open if Iran chooses peace,’ just after accusing the Ayatollah regime of ‘sowing death and destruction.’
This calculated duality seems straight out of Machiavelli's The Prince, where the sovereign is advised to know how to ‘use the beast and the man.’ This rhetorical technique, which he has mastered to perfection, allows him to rise above diplomatic orthodoxies.
His approach seems to reverse Clausewitz's adage that war is the continuation of politics by other means. For Trump, diplomacy itself becomes the continuation of war — a psychological, narrative and economic war.
The fact that much of the speech was improvised is not a detail, but the key to its effectiveness. This calculated spontaneity allowed him to navigate with disconcerting ease from humour to defiance, from irony to thunderous applause.
His gesture towards opposition leader Yair Lapid — ‘BB, be nice to him, you're not at war anymore and I like him a lot’ — was a masterstroke: a call for national unity disguised as familiarity, which positioned him as the benevolent godfather of the Israeli political scene.
The apogee of a symbolic reign
The emotional peak was reached when he described Jerusalem as ‘the eternal and indivisible capital of the State of Israel’. But the political climax came when he publicly asked the Israeli president to consider a full pardon for Benjamin Netanyahu.
At that precise moment, only half of the chamber rose, exposing the seismic divide that runs through the country.
Ultimately, as General de Gaulle observed in his War Memoirs:
‘True diplomacy always presupposes a certain community of views between the parties. But force remains the last argument.’
Trump embodies this vision, in which power is not a taboo, but the primary lever for reshaping reality.
The spectacle, brilliant as it was, will still have to prove its staying power. But one thing is certain: on that day in Jerusalem, Donald Trump did not just give a speech. He delivered a performance that redefined the limits of what is possible in international politics.
His legacy may not be measured in treaties, but in the very reconfiguration of what we thought was the art of the possible.