No Trump card for an end to Middle East war

The incoming US administration is unlikely to demand an early ceasefire or read chapter and verse of humanitarian law to Israel

Once the confetti of the inaugural balls has been cleared away, it is possible that Donald Trump may give his attention to the Middle East. Possible, but not certain, because Washington, D.C. can be a very self-absorbed place — and perhaps never more so than under a Trump presidency. There could be distractions – a meeting with Vladimir Putin, mass deportations, sweeping tariffs, and so on.

Trump chided Biden for trying to hold back Netanyahu, though that too was hardly a valid presumption (Photo by Jack GUEZ / AFP) (AFP)

But it is possible that Susie Wiles, the competent chief of staff, may slip Trump a memo on the Middle East. She would only be doing her job, which includes telling the president what he doesn’t want to hear – that the US cannot wish away its responsibilities in the region. The presidential mind would struggle with contradictions — the need to live up to being the Deal Maker, the man who ends wars; the need to please Christian evangelicals, Jewish mega-donors, the Messianic Israeli Right wing, the powerful Jewish organisations; the need to silence the bleeding-heart chatter about 43,000 dead Palestinians; the need to pulverise Iran with maximum pressure but not get into a regional war; the need to please the Saudis without displeasing the Israelis. These contradictions make it difficult to say what the famously unpredictable president will do. But there are signposts that could indicate his broad approach.

First, Trump is regarded as the US president most supportive of Israel, though some may give Joe Biden that honour. During his first term, Trump recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the US embassy there, recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, shut down the Palestinian mission in Washington, declared that Israeli settlements in the West Bank were not illegal and switched off the funding for UNRWA much before the agency was outlawed by Israel. He fashioned, through his son-in-law Jared Kushner, the Abraham Accords which envisaged normalisation of Israel’s relations with Arab nations and put forward a peace plan based on pie-in-the-sky economic fantasies and a mockery of a Palestinian State. He also pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal, much to Israel’s joy. All this made for further regional instability and set the stage for the October 7 attack.

Trump’s campaign rhetoric is another signpost. He told Benjamin Netanyahu to quickly “finish the job” in Gaza as Israel was “losing the PR battle”. Lately, Trump chided Biden for trying to hold back Netanyahu, though that too was hardly a valid presumption; Arab Americans voted against Harris to protest US bombs killing their brethren. There were no calls for a ceasefire or for ending the indiscriminate killing of civilians, except to say that sometimes you have to “let things play out.” Kushner also talked of “finishing” the job. Cynically ignoring the wanton destruction of Gaza and repeated displacement of the population, he viewed Gaza as a “very valuable… water-front property” if only the miserable residents could be moved to the Negev. While statesmen have fashioned the principle of Land for Peace, real estate developers think only of a piece of land.

The third signpost records developments post Trump’s win, celebrated by Netanyahu as “history’s greatest comeback”. The read-out of the Bibi-Trump phone call highlighted only Israel’s security and the Iran threat. Far-right Israeli ministers and mainstream Jewish organisations have extended an exuberant welcome to a “proven ally”. Betting on a Trump victory and under cover of election day, Netanyahu dismissed the recalcitrant defence minister, Yoav Gallant, whom Trump had earlier called “a jerk”. Wide protests broke out in Israel.

These signposts hold out little hope for any dramatic improvement. Trump is unlikely to put any serious pressure on Netanyahu for an early ceasefire, even though therein lies hope for surviving hostages. He will not read chapter and verse of humanitarian law to Netanyahu or push him to provide greater humanitarian aid for Gaza. American arms support and diplomatic shield to Israel will remain unchanged. Possibly, to keep up appearances, Trump may want Netanyahu to show some winding down in time for Inauguration Day on January 20. What happens till then is unclear: Netanyahu will take full advantage of the lame duck period and ignore any admonishments by the electorally frustrated Biden administration, which, in any case, will be too little, too late. Even if the actual Israeli actions in Gaza and South Lebanon stop, Trump will let Netanyahu take the lead on what is to be done thereafter. A peace process in support of the Palestinians will not be on the cards. Nevertheless, Trump, being risk averse, will not want to be drawn into a regional war, so a direct Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities may be a bridge too far for Netanyahu; Iran, too, knowing Trump’s unpredictability, will think twice before any escalation. Additionally, Netanyahu will forge ahead on the domestic front with the constitutional coup he wants, confident that Trump will not restrain him.

None of this translates into lasting regional peace or a fundamental resolution of the conflict. Unbridled messianic elements in Israel are pushing for potential annexation of the West Bank and settlements in Gaza, certain of Trump’s backing for their expansionist agenda. Trump would ideally like to still bring about Israel-Saudi normalisation. But Gaza has changed the ground situation dramatically; the Saudis will now find it hard to normalise relations with Israel as if nothing has happened. The fig leaf needed for further normalisation is a path towards a Palestinian State. Even the thought is now anathema for much of Israel. Things are likely to get worse, and even then, they may not get better.

Navtej Sarna is a former ambassador of India to the United States. The views expressed are personal