As Donald Trump prepares for a second presidential term, speculation is rising about how his administration will handle the complexities of the Middle East. Trump’s firm support for Israel is well-known, but his track record also shows a preference for avoiding major wars. Based on his previous policies, his approach is likely to continue several elements of his predecessor Joe Biden’s strategy, while introducing some significant differences that reflect his “America First” policy.

Trump’s support for Israel is a cornerstone of his Middle East policy. During his first term, he made significant moves, including relocating the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and backing Israel’s right to expand settlements in the West Bank. This approach intensified American support for Israel but strained relations with Palestinians and complicated the peace process. Trump’s second term is expected to see a similar pro-Israel stance, especially considering that Miriam Adelson, a prominent Israeli-American billionaire, is his campaign’s top donor. Adelson’s financial support comes with the expectation that Trump will permit further annexation of the West Bank, a move that could eliminate the possibility of a two-state solution.

Despite this strong support, Trump’s strategy regarding the ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon remains ambiguous. Though he criticized Biden for being “too tough” on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he has not outlined a specific plan to address these conflicts. Reports indicate that Trump has suggested the war should end by January, but this could be mere campaign rhetoric rather than a concrete policy. His statements in Michigan, where he hinted at ending the Gaza conflict, may also reflect a strategic appeal to Arab and Muslim voters rather than an actual shift in stance.

During his campaign, Trump attacked Biden’s administration for a perceived weakness on Israeli security, particularly targeting Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump’s critique, however, has lacked substantive details on how he might improve Israel’s security beyond offering broad support. Instead, his commitment to allowing Israel to maintain its dominance in the region, including policies like cutting off aid to Gaza, suggests that his administration may prioritize Israeli interests above all else.

If Trump permits Israel to entirely cut off aid to Gaza, which currently receives limited humanitarian assistance, the result could be catastrophic. The potential for a humanitarian crisis raises questions about whether Trump will adopt a more hardline stance or mirror Biden’s policy of limited engagement. This approach may result in continued suffering for Gaza’s population without actively resolving the underlying conflict.

While Biden entered office with a plan to restore the Iran Nuclear Deal, end US support for the Yemen war, and take a tougher stance against Saudi Arabia, these goals ultimately proved elusive. Instead, Biden largely adopted Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran and continued his predecessor’s normalization efforts between Israel and several Arab nations. This continuity reflects the bipartisan consensus in Washington on certain Middle East policies, especially in regard to countering Iran’s influence and maintaining strong ties with Gulf states like Saudi Arabia.

Biden’s efforts to normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, underscored by the launch of the India-Middle East-Europe Trade Corridor, echo Trump’s earlier policies. This trade corridor is intended to enhance cooperation between the US, Israel, and Arab states, aiming to create a regional alliance often referred to as an “Arab NATO.” However, Biden’s plans were dealt a major setback when Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel in October 2023, exposing the weaknesses in the existing US strategy and underscoring the complexities of Palestinian issues that Washington had overlooked.

Trump’s approach to Iran will likely reflect a blend of hawkish posturing and cautious pragmatism. His first administration focused on applying economic pressure on Tehran while avoiding direct military confrontation. Although Trump could theoretically escalate tensions with Iran, launching a large-scale war appears unlikely. Such a conflict would be costly, unpredictable, and could have significant repercussions for the US economy-a priority area for Trump’s second term.

However, given his longstanding opposition to Iran’s influence in the region, Trump may pursue increased sanctions or covert operations to destabilize Tehran. His warm relations with Saudi Arabia and the UAE could facilitate joint efforts to counter Iran’s presence in countries like Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Yet, a direct conflict would contradict Trump’s stated goal of prioritizing domestic economic growth, making it more plausible that he will avoid a full-scale war while still adopting aggressive rhetoric to signal US strength.

The ongoing war in Gaza presents a significant challenge for Trump’s Middle East policy. While he may support Israel’s right to defend itself, Trump’s administration will likely encourage Israel to achieve a swift end to the conflict. However, a prolonged war could further inflame tensions in the region, jeopardize Trump’s normalization goals, and strain relationships with Arab allies who oppose Israel’s military actions in Gaza.

Any attempt by Israel to annex additional areas in the West Bank-especially Area C, which comprises around 60 percent of the territory-could effectively dismantle the prospect of a two-state solution, alienate Palestinian leaders, and spark wider unrest. While Biden’s administration has kept such ambitions in check, Trump’s support for Israel may embolden Netanyahu’s government to pursue more aggressive territorial claims, creating further instability in the region.

The outcome of Israel’s current conflicts will heavily shape Trump’s policy in the Middle East. If Israel suffers significant losses, either due to direct confrontation with Iran and Hezbollah or through prolonged hostilities, it may be forced to adopt a more conciliatory approach toward Palestinians. This would likely demand concessions that could alter Trump’s policy goals in the region, as a weakened Israeli government may be less willing to engage in further escalation.

On the other hand, if Israel manages to secure a diplomatic solution that brings an end to the current hostilities, Trump’s administration could focus on strengthening a coalition between Israel and Arab states. Such a coalition would enable the US to maintain its influence in the region while sidelining Iranian ambitions. Nevertheless, Trump’s priority on American economic interests and domestic stability will likely deter him from pursuing any overt military interventions, favoring instead a policy of indirect influence and economic alliances.

Trump’s anticipated Middle East policy, while offering unwavering support for Israel, is expected to follow a path of continuity with Biden’s strategy, albeit with a more aggressive stance in some areas. His alignment with the Republican Party’s pro-Israel platform and connections with influential donors like Adelson suggest a strong bias toward policies favoring Israeli interests. However, his desire to avoid costly wars and his focus on the US economy may act as constraints on his willingness to escalate conflicts in the region.

While Trump’s policies will likely not diverge significantly from Biden’s in substance, they may adopt a more provocative tone, particularly regarding Iran and Palestinian autonomy. The possibility of a major conflict remains, though the likelihood is tempered by Trump’s pragmatism and reluctance to engage in prolonged wars. The real test of Trump’s Middle East policy will depend on how the region responds to his staunch support for Israel, as well as the ability of his administration to navigate the complex dynamics of a post-conflict Israeli-Palestinian landscape.

In summary, Trump’s second term will likely see a continuation of existing US strategies in the Middle East, with an emphasis on supporting Israel, pressuring Iran, and fostering alliances with Arab states. However, the potential for sudden shifts, particularly if regional instability escalates, underscores the uncertainty that often accompanies Trump’s foreign policy approach.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel