Confronting the Crossroads: Trump's Middle East Policy Dilemmas Ahead
©This is Beirut

As Donald Trump prepares to take office again in January 2025, reflecting on his previous administration's lessons will help shape effective strategies to address the complex challenges in the Middle East.

If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were to meet and speak with Trump before taking office, this engagement could signal a strong alignment between the two leaders, particularly given Netanyahu's clear preference for a Trump presidency. Such a dynamic could foster a more collaborative approach to winding down ongoing conflicts, as Trump might seek to prioritize stability in the region, steering away from prolonged military engagements that have characterized the past several years.

Trump's foreign policy philosophy, encapsulated in “peace through strength,” emphasized an assertive military posture as a precursor to diplomatic negotiations, a strategy that resonated with many supporters who viewed increased military spending as a tool for projecting American power. However, the efficacy of this approach has been debated, especially amidst escalating tensions involving Iran and Israel.

Furthermore, the prospect of Mike Huckabee serving as US Ambassador to Israel could enhance these efforts. Huckabee's strong ties to Israel and understanding of its political landscape might enable meaningful private discussions with Israeli leaders regarding the feasibility of a ceasefire. If Huckabee were to advocate for dialogue and negotiation, it could open pathways for resolving issues that have long been considered non-starters, especially if there's a strategic objective to prevent President Biden from utilizing a ceasefire as a focal point of his legacy.

Former US Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman warned in a commentary in Brookings that a second Trump administration could significantly impact the delicate balance of power between Iran and Israel, potentially leading to increased tensions. He urged Arab nations to consider whether to bolster their own security measures or risk being sidelined in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape. This prospect may raise concerns about the future stability of the region.

During his first term, Trump garnered praise for his role as a “peacemaker,” most notably for the Abraham Accords, which facilitated the normalization of relations between Israel and several Arab states. Former National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien highlighted in Foreign Affairs the necessity of a robust military presence to address regional threats and protect US interests. He emphasized that the Accords represented a landmark achievement in fostering cooperation, reshaping alliances and promoting a foundation for potential peace in the Middle East.

Experts considered that Trump's previous approach was pragmatic, focusing on partnership-building rather than adherence to traditional foreign policy doctrines. Looking ahead, it remains critical for Trump to maintain this realistic posture, particularly as Arab nations grapple with long-standing rivalries and the urgent need for strategic alliances to counteract Iranian ambitions. Feltman indicates that the strength of these nations will not solely rely on military might; instead, collaborative diplomacy will be essential for crafting a secure and prosperous future.

Contrast With the Biden Administration's Approach

President Biden's tenure saw a different approach to the Middle East, marked by attempts to navigate the complicated geopolitical landscape. While striving for peace, the Biden administration faced challenges, particularly regarding relationships with key allies and adversaries. The Biden administration's policies diverge sharply from Trump's “maximum pressure” strategy, which relied on extensive sanctions against Iran to rally support from regional partners such as Saudi Arabia and set the stage for the historic Abraham Accords.

While some experts believed that Trump's strategy showcased a front that projected American strength and encouraged cooperation among allies for enduring peace, advocates for reinstating a “maximum pressure” approach suggest that recommitting to rigorous sanctions and increasing military presence could effectively deter Iranian aggression. However, Trump himself articulated a reluctance to engage in large-scale military conflicts, a sentiment echoed by his vice president-elect, JD Vance, who emphasized the importance of avoiding war with Iran.

These positions could have significant implications for ongoing tensions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the dynamics between Israel and Hezbollah. Iran's backing of various militant groups in the region complicates the prospect of long-term resolutions, highlighting the necessity of addressing Iranian influence as a central component of any peace effort. James Carafano from the Heritage Foundation indicated to the Washington Post that Trump would likely avoid constraining Israel's responses to threats posed by Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas, underscoring the ongoing prioritization of countering Iranian activities as a cornerstone of US policy.

As Donald Trump approaches his second term amidst the conflicts in the Middle East, the lessons learned from his previous administration will be key in addressing the multifaceted challenges posed by Iran, Israel and various regional players. Yet, collaboration and a nuanced understanding of the diverse interests at play will be essential to the region's evolving dynamics.

Comments
  • No comment yet