The Middle East According to Trump

 

And Trump said let there be Peace, and behold there was Peace, and Trump said let the hostages go and behold the hostages were released, and Trump said let the Palestinians return to their homes, and behold the Palestinians returned to their rubble. So it was said, so it shall be done.

Well, to be fair, he didn't exactly say it like that; the President-Elect of the United States of America, Donald Trump, is quoted as saying, 'all hell will break out in the Middle East' if Gaza doesn't release hostages. Divinity hasn't quite reached him yet, so bluntness will do for now rather than trying to emulate the words of Isaiah. He probably knows what the Hell is and probably wouldn't know who the hell was or is Isaiah. But that is another story.

Diplomacy is not a strong point when it comes to his foreign policies, so instead, he huffs and puffs until he blows the house down in presenting American Power on the world stage. Power to Peace would be the iconic language for the next four years. He is full of himself. His projection of American political status is upfront. Indeed, he takes on the mantle of God-given rights of kings, unabashedly rejecting traditional diplomacy on the world’s stage. The majority of US voters appointed him the driver of the most powerful military and economic machines on the planet, giving him his license to cross all the red lights.

But enough about this ​Legally defined sexual predator who boasted on Access Hollywood that women let him "grab 'em by the pussy’ President-elect of the United States; obviously, lechery goes a long way in American politics. But for this piece, let's come down to earth, specifically to the Middle East.

The focus is Gaza and Israel for now and ending the fifteen-month damaging War that has killed over 50,000 innocent civilian Palestinians and more than 2000 Israeli soldiers aside from unknown numbers of hostages who may have died while incarcerated. The War resulted from Hammas attacking a Kibbutz where young people were partying in southern Israel on 7th October 2023, killing about 1,200 people and taking 251 back to Gaza as hostages, which triggered a massive Israeli offensive on Gaza. The United States, Egypt, Turkey and Qatar have been key players in these peace negotiations. It is widely reported that the two adversaries have finally reached a hostage release agreement, and a ceasefire will follow. 

The deal is made up of three stages, the first of which is expected on Sunday, 19th January 2025, one day before Donald Trump's inauguration also, marking the beginning of a six-week truce. It stipulates the release of 33 hostages over a six-week period, including women, children, older adults and wounded civilians, in exchange for potentially hundreds of Palestinian women and children imprisoned by Israel. In the meantime, as I am writing this, three days before the appointed date, the War and the killing go on. The Peace process could break down between now and Sunday since the element of mistrust on both sides underlines the long road to arrive at this stage.  

One of Israel's continued key war aims has been to destroy Hamas's military and governing capabilities. Israel has severely damaged it after 15 months of IDF operations backed by daily deadly airstrikes. However, as evidenced by the fact that it can still negotiate, Hamas still has some capacity to operate and regroup.

The Peacedeal heralded, maybe prematurely, as the deal of the century was first proposed in May 2023 by President Biden, who takes the credit for the present agreement that it is based on the framework he set out back then. At the time, Iran, the main sponsor of Hamas, as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, were riding high, deluded in their inviolability. Well, since then, the severe erosion of Iran's firepower capacity and its dependence for now on conventional deterrence has weakened its proxies, and all three have seen their firepower disintegrate; their first casualty was the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. That followed a severe air bombardment of the Houthis and the consequent crushing of Hezbollah forces in Southern Lebanon. The "Axis of Resistance", a key part of Iran's grand strategy, is dislocated. Besides, Israel's IDF is tired of War, having almost non-stop fighting on three fronts for the last twelve months with nothing more to show for it except further killing. The negotiating table should be where it's at. Peace from weariness instead of through Power.  

Naturally, Trump, never one to miss the limelight, also claims the pivotal role in ending the War and bringing about the hitherto elusive ceasefire. But what he added, so far as I can tell, are two headliners. One is Pressure, which includes economic and military sanctions and diplomatic isolation, and the other is Guarantee, which promises military support and security assurances. Both are aimed at Israel. Many of the news media are reporting this without saying what type of Pressure or what sort of guarantees Trump has laid out, but what seems to happen is that Israel's about-turn in crushing Hammas forever but now accepts the inevitable. The main objective of Trump's representative in the peace talks was to end the War before inauguration day.

I am not a political scientist, but I will stick my neck out and attempt to unpack the 'inevitable' in layman's language. The Guarantees remain unanswered, and the leverages in securing the deal concern Iran in the first place, the Saudis and, most importantly, the West Bank and, although a long way off, the idea of a two-state solution could once more gain substance.

L'État, c'est moi

Iran's weakening of its conventional military deterrence left it with no alternative but to resume its nuclear ambition despite the piles of sanctions the previous Trump administration imposed on it. This time around, there would undoubtedly be more of the same in an effort to cripple such trajectories finally. Europe, whatever political clout left for itself, would follow suit, a cumulative effort in the hope of bringing down Iran's oppressive and authoritarian theocratic regime. It is not far-fetched if oil-rich Iraq, an adherent supporter of Iran, may find itself in a similar circumstance. Iraq's economy, which is heavily dependent on imports, can easily buckle under the strain of economic sanctions.

The losers in the deal, I envisage, are, yet again, the Palestinian people and, maybe ideologically, Jordan. There is a remote chance that America will compensate the Palestinians by offering an independent Gaza as a way out of a two-state enterprise. A loss of the West Bank would, at a stroke, legalise the Jewish settlement already there to further encourage Jewish immigration to their promised land, Judaea and Samaria. This may indeed result in social unrest among the Palestinians, but American Power, or MAGA for short, is always ready to see to it. Trump is no friend of the Palestinians, nor has he had the American Evangelicals to think about.  This time around, he has more of a free reign.

The Israeli premier told lawmakers recently that Israel's War in Gaza had offered opportunities to sign new peace accords with Arab nations and 'dramatically change the face of' the Middle East. The Abraham Accord started under Trump's first administration to expand, taking in the oil-rich Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have, for the last couple of years, held steadfast that it would not recognise Israel unless the latter accepts and implements the framework of a two-state solution for the Palestinian people. There you have it. Gaza independence can seal that deal, so says Trump.

The Middle East remains one of the world's most geopolitically complex and dynamic regions. A mix of historical grievances, ethnic and sectarian divides, external interventions, and resource competition often drives border changes and geopolitical shifts. While predicting the future is inherently uncertain, several trends, variables and factors could influence the region's borders and geopolitics.    Sectarianism, fragmentations along ideological and ethnic lines, and the solidification of semi-autonomous regions would have to be considered. Potential annexation of the West Bank, a central to the Palestinian cause and Turkish interest in Iraq and Syria to secure its borders from Turkish agitation appears increasingly likely, with counterterrorism they will continue to shape regional dynamics and fuel instability.

The Abraham Accords and subsequent normalisation deals between Israel and Arab countries like the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan have reshaped regional dynamics. The potential inclusion of Saudi Arabia in such agreements would be a significant milestone. However, a broader peace will likely depend on some resolution to the Palestinian issue, whether through renewed negotiations or alternative frameworks. Rather than US power subduing Palestinian resistance, economic initiatives, such as increased investments in Palestinian territories or shared infrastructure projects, act as confidence and trust-building measures.

The likelihood of the West Bank being formally annexed by Israel, similar to the annexation of the Golan Heights, depends on a complex interplay of domestic, regional, and international factors. The West Bank, which was captured in 1967, remains a highly contested area. It is home to a large Palestinian population and numerous Israeli settlements. Unlike the Golan Heights, the West Bank is central to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has been envisioned as part of a future Palestinian state in most peace frameworks.

The current Israeli government, particularly under leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu, includes factions that support annexation. They argue that the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria) is historically and religiously part of Israel. There is every reason to believe that is what Trump has guaranteed Israel as the next episode of the Abraham Accords, which proved that normalisation does not necessarily depend on resolving the Palestinian issue despite the chorus of condemnation from European countries.

The main problem for Israel is Demography. Annexing the entire West Bank would mean absorbing a large Palestinian population. This could challenge Israel's identity as both a Jewish and democratic state, as granting Palestinians full citizenship would alter its demographic balance while denying them rights would attract accusations of apartheid. Annexation could destabilise neighbouring Jordan, which has a peace treaty with Israel and a large Palestinian population. It might also reignite tensions with other Arab states, even those that have normalised relations with Israel.

Trump has a lot of work to do.

The Sun King has more than his head in the Clouds.