Just days after his surprising win in the 2016 presidential race, Donald Trump expressed an ambitious vision to broker the “ultimate deal” between Israelis and Palestinians, aiming to end the ongoing conflict. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump shared his enthusiasm: “As a dealmaker, I’d love to negotiate … the deal that seems impossible. And do it for humanity’s sake.”
Fast forward over eight years, Trump, now back in the White House after a Democratic hiatus, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, reiterated his interest in creating this ultimate peace deal. Notably, Trump’s approach significantly deviates from the traditional strategies championed by years of bipartisan foreign policy experts.
To understand his current stance, let’s revisit Trump’s first term. Between 2017 and 2021, he emerged as the most pro-Israel president since Israel’s founding in 1948. By January 2020, after significant moves such as withdrawing the U.S. from the Iran nuclear agreement, relocating the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, and acknowledging Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, Trump presented his “Peace to Prosperity” plan. Unveiled at the White House with Netanyahu, it aimed to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and was notably the most pro-Israel solution ever proposed by an American leader.
The Peace to Prosperity plan stirred controversy by endorsing Israel’s claims over contested territories in the Jordan Valley and the West Bank, frustrating many traditional Arab allies of the Palestinians. In June 2020, this tension led the UAE’s ambassador, Yousef Al Otaiba, to pen a Hebrew article opposing more Israeli territorial claims. Yet, just two months later, the UAE became the first Arab nation in over 25 years to make peace with Israel. Following its lead, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan joined the UAE in the historic Abraham Accords.
Trump and Netanyahu’s achievements in fostering Israeli-Arab relations surpassed the efforts of all previous U.S. presidents and Israeli prime ministers combined. They challenged the longstanding belief advocated by numerous “peace process” experts in Washington that only further Israeli concessions would initiate peace. Traditionally, this “inside-out” strategy involved forming a Palestinian state first, then hoping Arab nations would normalize relations with Israel. Trump and Netanyahu flipped this script with their “outside-in” method.
The strategy yielded unexpected success. Both leaders recognized, from Israel’s 2005 unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the subsequent chaos there, that a two-state solution had already been trialed unsuccessfully.
Now, we return to the current situation. Trump recently suggested that Egypt and Jordan—countries historically linked to the Palestinian issue due to post-World War I arrangements—could integrate the Arab population of Gaza. Despite its unpopularity in the Arab world, Trump has previously navigated similar obstacles with resolve.
Consider, for instance, prior presidents—Clinton, Bush, and Obama—who avoided moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem despite a 1995 congressional mandate, fearing backlash from Arab nations. Trump, however, executed this move confidently.
Certainly, there was dissent post-decision, and we should expect similar reactions now. Observers will closely watch as Jordan’s King Abdullah II visits the White House.
Yet, interestingly, the idea of redistribution to Jordan and Egypt is just the beginning. On Tuesday, Trump surprised attendees, including possibly his Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, by stating the U.S. plans to “take over” Gaza following Israel’s conflict with Hamas. He envisions transforming Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” contingent upon the initial population redistribution.
Whether we take Trump literally here or view this as a strategic negotiation tactic is yet to be seen. It might resemble his 2020 Peace to Prosperity plan, serving as a bargaining asset, potentially luring Saudi Arabia into the Abraham Accords. Evidence supporting this strategy includes Trump’s recent delay of tariffs on Canada and Mexico contingent on those countries reinforcing their borders.
Ultimately, deciphering Trump’s strategy can be challenging. While skepticism is warranted, so too is optimism. His track record of defying conventional expectations suggests he might surprise us yet again.
Josh Hammer is a senior editor-at-large for Newsweek. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. @josh_hammer
