The more conciliatory approach through the Middle East has also led Trump to give conciliatory signals to Iran, saying the United States wants it to be “a wonderful, safe, great country,” only if its leaders would give up their long-standing efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.
By Alon PINKAS
Donald Trump’s Middle East visit – essentially a quick tour of the Persian Gulf – was not about Israel. But, for Israelis, it was all about Israel, and not just because the US president had blatantly avoided including Jerusalem on the itinerary of his first official international tour of his second term. Long before Trump shook hands in Saudi Arabia with Ahmed al-Sharaan, the former jihadist and “young, attractive guy” who is now the Islamist leader of Syria, and announced that the US would lift sanctions imposed by the Obama administration, this four-day, three-nation visit had upended the dynamics in the Middle East, reshaped priorities and upset Israel.
In just a few days, Trump has not only called for an end to the war in Gaza three times, but has also extended an olive branch to Israel’s archenemy, Iran – emphasizing his interest in pursuing a nuclear deal with Tehran – and secured the release of Edan Alexander, the 21-year-old American-Israeli hostage taken in October (who was held in a cage and tortured by Hamas), through direct negotiations with his terrorist captors.
Not bad for a 48-hour job. But it is significant that he held talks in Riyadh with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish leader and Netanyahu’s sworn enemy.
While Trump is busy dismantling the world – the Pax Americana, the post-1945 world order – he is simultaneously showing a desire to intervene and provide solutions to crises and conflicts around the world: Ukraine-Russia, India-Pakistan, the war in Gaza and now, surprisingly, engagement with Iran. He has even become involved in the conflict between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Unlike the last 80 years when the United States has perceived itself and shaped policy as the arbiter and global agenda-setter, Trump is modeling itself as a mediator, not as an imperialist military and diplomatic power involved in interventions and protracted wars that rarely benefit the US.
“America has no permanent enemies,” he declared in Riyadh on Tuesday, quoting Lord Palmerston who, in 1848, as the United Kingdom’s foreign secretary, told Parliament: “We [Britain] have no permanent allies and we have no permanent enemies. Our interests are permanent and eternal.”
A few days after the shameful withdrawal from the exaggerated tariffs imposed on China – reducing them from 145 percent to 30 percent for a 90-day “pause” period – came the equally spectacular declaration that the US would lift sanctions on Syria.
The more conciliatory approach through the Middle East has also led Trump to give conciliatory signals towards Iran, saying that the United States wants it to be “a wonderful, safe, great country,” only if its leaders would give up their long-standing efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.
Two weeks ago, he had also announced the suspension of military operations against the Yemeni Houthis, calling them “brave.” One can only imagine the outburst of public anger and hysteria if Barack Obama or Joe Biden had used this term for a group designated as a terrorist organization by the White House.
It is now beyond reasonable doubt that Donald Trump, by nature and actions, is a figure characterized by transaction and unpredictability. His visit to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar was widely billed as a “business trip.” And rightly so – he secured a $142 billion arms deal – which was in effect the fulfillment of a promise made by the Saudis during his previous visit in 2017 – with a commitment to invest another $450 billion, perhaps more, of Saudi funds in the US.
But here is a fundamental truth in Trump’s trade diplomacy: he goes where he can get something. Reciprocity is key. And since Netanyahu ruined Trump’s Gaza plan by breaking the ceasefire with airstrikes on Hamas targets, the Israeli administration no longer has anything tangible of value to offer the White House.
For Trump, Netanyahu has become an obstacle. This disappointment has further marginalized Israel’s position in relation to American policy.
The conventional wisdom has been that despite the disaster of October 7, Israel’s geopolitical situation was improving significantly: Hamas had been badly damaged, Hezbollah had been further weakened by the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, and Iran had been compromised by Israel’s precision strikes on its air defenses. With the US attacking the Houthis in Yemen, Israel seemed in a strategically advantageous position.
Four months into Trump’s presidency, Washington has grown weary of the lack of results from Netanyahu’s war in Gaza, suspended attacks on the Houthis, opened diplomatic channels with Tehran, and sees Turkey and Saudi Arabia as reliable allies.
Trump’s visit to the Persian Gulf was not intended to reshape the Middle East, nor to focus on Israel. But it has quickly become exactly that.
It is also now clear that Israelis should no longer look to Trump for answers, but to their own prime minister who, single-handedly and with an abundance of arrogance and overconfidence, has led the country into this strategic impasse.
(The author is a former Israeli consul general in the US, once a political advisor to two former Israeli prime ministers, Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak)