Ever the showman one, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu was up to his old tricks again recently. Last Monday, he addressed a half empty UN General Assembly chamber and then came to Washington for what was reported to be a rather chilly meeting with Barack Obama.

His UN speech was classic Netanyahu – ominous doomsday warnings coupled with red meat for the faithful, followed by misdirection and, for good measure, a bit of outright deceit intended for media consumption.

The latter, most notably, included the prime minister’s offer to the Arab states to join with Israel in creating “a productive partnership that would build a more secure, peaceful and prosperous Middle East”. The idea being something along the lines of we can’t make peace with Palestinians, but if you make peace with us, then we can work together to find a solution to all our problems. This Israeli fantasy has been around for decades.

It is, in effect, a desire to turn the Arab Peace Initiative on its head with Israel seeking to secure the benefits of regional recognition and normalisation, while paying no price in return.

To the uninitiated, or the true-believer, the idea has some appeal, making it appear that Mr Netanyahu is taking the “high road” in fighting extremism and seeking peace. It is, however, a non-starter since it is something that no Arab leader and most certainly no segment of Arab public opinion will tolerate. No Arab, at this point, will walk over the bodies of Gaza’s dead or bypass Arab rights in Jerusalem.

There is another more fundamental problem and that is that Mr Netanyahu wasn’t serious. His proposal wasn’t real. It was, instead, the sort of clever gamesmanship for which the Israeli PM is notorious. As is often the case, when he is backed into a corner, Mr Netanyahu will try to change the subject.

It was disturbing that instead of dismissing this stunt, the New York Times took the bait and headlined their report on the Israeli leader’s speech and meeting with Mr Obama as “Netanyahu Sees Arab Alliance Aiding Mideast Peace”.

The accompanying story began: “Benjamin Netanyahu raised the tantalising prospect that a new Arab alliance could resuscitate Israel’s moribund peace talks with the Palestinians, but Barack Obama responded with a familiar complaint, that Jewish settlements are the real problem.

“In an Oval Office meeting that spoke to both the rapidly shifting landscape in the Middle East and the enduring realities of the peace process, Mr Obama and Mr Netanyahu discussed how the Islamic State militant group was reshaping the region, with Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab states lining up with Israel against a common foe.

“That alignment, Mr Netanyahu declared in a speech on Monday at the UN, could be the foundation for the renewal of the Palestinian peace negotiations, which fell apart in April over Jewish settlements and other disputes. It has also left the Israeli leader in an arguably stronger position in the region, if not internationally”.

The headline and the framing of the story were both misleading and disturbing, portraying Mr Netanyahu as a visionary who sees new possibilities in a changing world, and Mr Obama as stuck in the past with nothing to offer but “a familiar complaint”. But wading further into this story makes it clear that the headline and the lead paragraphs were, in fact, nothing more than the misdirection Mr Netanyahu had hoped for.

Right before the White House meeting, Israel had approved more than 2,000 new settlement units in East Jerusalem and a group of hardline settlers had occupied a number of homes in Silwan, an Arab community also in East Jerusalem.

Far from being just Mr Obama’s “familiar complaint,” settlement expansion is the modus operandi of the Israeli government, a policy that makes it clear that Mr Netanyahu has no intention of reaching a just peace agreement with the Palestinians.

In the aftermath of the horrific slaughter of innocents in Gaza and in the midst of the rapid expansion of Jewish-only colonies in and around occupied Jerusalem, any talk of an “Arab Alliance” with Israel becomes sheer nonsense. And the notion that Israel is now in an “arguably stronger position in the region, if not internationally” is also nonsense.

With Israel facing an investigation into its bombing of UN facilities in Gaza, a Security Council vote on a pending Palestinian resolution to set a date for Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories, growing international outrage over its behaviour, Israel is, in fact, more isolated then ever. And because the US continues to be Israel’s strongest ally, it is putting the US at risk, as well.

The very next day, the New York Times ran an editorial entitled “Mr. Netanyahu’s Strange Course”, in which they rebutted not only the prime minister but the aforementioned article.

They referred to the newly announced settlements as “another in a string of calculated embarrassments that ... have undermined American efforts” and quoted the administration rebuke that the new construction “would bring international condemnation [that would] distance Israel from even its closest allies.”

As is often the case, Mr Netanyahu’s clever but disingenuous ploys can’t stand up in the face of reality. The Israeli prime minister may have initially fooled the New York Times headline writers and story editors. But in the end, the paper got it right when they closed their editorial noting “Mr. Netanyahu’s present course is antagonising everyone”.

Dr James Zogby is the president of the Arab American Institute

On Twitter: @aaiusa