Art of the Deal?
Trump’s Reconciling of Arab Partnership with Palestinian Genocide
In the days prior to the mid-May Gulf-US summit, a Jerusalem Post article citing activity among “Gulf diplomatic sources” prompted online speculation on of whether President Trump would formally recognisze a Palestinian state. That same week, speaking on the Judging Freedompodcast, policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs interpreted PM Netanyahu’s comment that Israel may needto “wean [itself] off American military aid” as possibly indicative of his advanced knowledge of a major US foreign policy shift.
Although rRecognizing a sovereign Palestine would seemsingly to contradict Trump’s February plan to forcibly displace the Gazan population and construct a Middle Eastern “riviera.,” But this step cwould achieve several US foreign policy aims. An independent Palestinian state, regardless of its practicality or defined borders – is Saudi Arabia’s key precondition for As the key precondition for Israel-Saudi normaliziatingon, relations withan independent Palestinian state Israel– regardless of its practicality or defined borders – . Were this deal to occur, it would present an opportunity for Arab-Israeli regional security initiatives and economic cooperation, under the pretext of having achieved “justice” for the Palestinians. The resultant US-Arab coalition would secure lucrative investments and arms sales for the United States, as well as politically isolate Iran and counterbalance its military influence in the region despite planned US troop withdrawals. This cooperative realignment would reflect Trump’s signaled preference for avoiding direct escalation with Tehran and his generally transactional approach to international diplomacy and deal-making. In short, Trump’s recognition of an undefined Palestinian state would be in line with his goal to expand the Abraham accords of his second mandate, without necessarily giving up Palestinian territory.
In light of his announcement to travel to Qatar, sSuch a declaration could have seemed imminent. would not have been surprising, either. Before the summit, Qatar announced its intention of gifting the Trump administration a Boeing 747 jet valued at $400 million, and the US announced plans to begin referring to the Persian Gulf as the “Gulf of Arabia,” potentially signifying the beginnings of a renewed US-Arab partnership.
In addition, PA President Mahmoud Abbas recently nominated a successor, indicating the makings of a reformed and revitalized Palestinian Authority to oversee the Arab-funded state-building and reconstruction projects ahead. But most importantly, reaching a two-state solution would require sidelining Netanyahu and the genocidal right-wing elements of the Israeli government, and a reported rift in the Trump-Netanyahu relationship suggests this fallout may be underway. NYT columnist and St Antony’s alumnus Thomas Friedman appeared to be manufacturing American public consent for this foreseeable rupture, attempting to differentiate between a rogue Netanyahu government and an Israeli state that otherwise maintains the right of self-defense.
The US recognition of Palestine would also have been suitably timed. The Netanyahu government had already vowed to seize full control of the Gaza Strip, inevitably entailing the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians – perhaps to Jordan or the Sinai– and the permanent elimination of both the two-state solution and the possibility of regional normalization. Meanwhile, the Trump administration successfully negotiated a deal to release the last American prisoner held by Hamas and dropped demands for the group’s disarmament, circumventing Netanyahu and demonstrating the possibility of a political settlement in line with Hamas’ 2017 charter.
By first achieving stability in the region, the Trump administration could haveaccumulated overseas investments and redirected its focus on implementing its authoritarian project domestically. However, the US did not recognize Palestine at this month’s Gulf summit. Rather, the above speculation ignores the fundamental logic of Zionism and the US-Israel relationship. An expansionist settler colonial state cannot be reasoned with politically so long as existential threats to its national narrative – the Palestinians – are allowed to survive. Centrist attempts (such as Friedman’s) to portray Netanyahu as “rogue” obscure the fact that the Gaza genocide and illegal West Bank settlements are the predictable manifestations of Zionism, his government as a mere symptom rather than a cause. Some scholars (including Israeli historian Avi Shlaim and myself) would therefore argue that the two-state solution died long ago. We also cannot discount the profound influence of Zionist ideology on governing Christian right-wing circles and congressional lobbyists in spite of declining US public support for Israel. No US administration would “reward terrorism” and transform this relationship hastily.
Thus, once in Qatar, Trump renewed his pitch of turning Gaza into a “freedom zone,” and Hamas later accused the US administration of deception and “trashing” their tentative ceasefire agreement. Why has Trump seemingly reversed course? One possible explanation is that the current US-Israel tensions concern not whether Gaza will be occupied, but how. As detailed earlier, the Trump administration will likely avoid regional destabilization at all costs, presenting itself in opposition to Palestinians’ violent expulsion to neighboring countries (especially Egypt) as a “red line.” But this administration may well be endeavoring to continue the American tradition of excusing Israel’s territorial ambitions by coordinating an occupation of Gaza that is profitable and minimally offensive to the renewed Arab coalition. (Make no mistake: this still amounts to genocide and ethnic cleansing, or a “second Nakba.”) Supporting this assertion, on May 16th, NBC News published an exclusive alleging that the Trump administration has begun devising a plan to relocate 1 million Palestinians to Libya, raising the matter directly with Libyan leadership. Although logistically questionable and grossly unjust, this proposal theoretically allows for Israel’s settler colonial expansion and continued regional integration.
Amid all this speculation, one fact remains indisputable: Palestinians in Gaza face the final stages of a 77-year-long genocide, and the United States – alongside the so-called international community – will remain forever complicit.