For all intents and purposes, US President Donald Trump is presenting himself as the arbiter of Arab-Israeli relations, and/or Arab-Israeli conflict and showing his presence as the patron for the time being, of the Gaza agreement. Therefore, no one, including Israel will be allowed to make him look bad in this multi-phased accord.
Most likely, his intention to reign in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and rejecting the Israeli rejection of the West Bank, boils down to keeping the Arabs on board in terms of money and influence for the success of his Gaza plan, as well as keeping his hopes alive for the Abrahamic Accords especially the red apple, Saudi-Israeli normalization.
Indeed Trump’s ambiguous stand of rejecting a Palestinian state while at the same time, rejecting Israeli annexation, either means giving the positive nod to Tel Aviv to create facts on the ground and create de facto annexation without the fanfare, and start the gradual population transfer, if we take Gaza as a precedence for his words, to Jordan and probably also to the wider Arab world, or, it could also be, that the future of the West Bank is intended to be united to the East Bank of River Jordan.
In the mean time, the world press talks about the continuous shuttle diplomacy of high-ranking Washington officials to Israel, and Trump’s warnings to Netanyahu, veiled as well explicit not to attempt to jeopardize the Gaza peace, to the extent of saying that Israel would lose all US support.
But what about the other side of this presumed potential rift? Netanyahu after two years of war, has nothing to show for it to the Israelis except barbarism, murder and destruction, in addition to gaining the status of becoming a fullyfledged international war criminal.
The war which he declared to finish off Hamas is increasingly controlled by the American plans, now, face a big failure with him reluctantly having to put up with. However it does not necessarily mean there are no other parties in his government, whose messianic fervour does not override the risk of losing American support, which indeed means, Netanyahu is now stuck between the rock and the hard place.
Indeed one cannot predict his longevity as the prime minister for Israel, but all what can be said is that, the alternative to him, is neither likely to be more peace loving, or more liberal in political outlook.
Dr Janbek is a Jordanian writer based in Paris, France
US Vice President JD Vance rejected Israel’s proposed annexation of the West Bank as a “stupid political stunt,” reaffirming Washington’s opposition to unilateral actions and commitment to the Gaza ceasefire.
US Vice President JD Vance delivered a sharp rebuke to Israeli lawmakers on Thursday, explicitly rejecting any annexation of the West Bank and characterizing the recent Knesset vote on the matter as “a stupid political stunt.”
Speaking to reporters in Tel Aviv, Vance left no ambiguity about the Trump administration’s position regarding the occupied Palestinian territory.
Clear US Policy Statement
“If it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and I personally take some insult to it,” Vance said regarding the Knesset’s preliminary approval of a bill to impose Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank.
He then delivered the administration’s definitive position: “The West Bank is not going to be annexed by Israel. The policy of the Trump administration is that the West Bank will not be annexed by Israel. That will continue to be our policy.”
Vance’s remarks came a day after the Knesset approved, by a vote of 25 to 24, a bill to impose Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank.
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir welcomed the vote, saying: “The time to impose sovereignty over the West Bank has come now.”
Meanwhile, the Likud party, which leads the ruling coalition, described the bill as “showy” and damaging to relations with Washington.
The US Vice President said that such unilateral steps “contradict Israel’s commitments to the peace process and international agreements,” and reiterated that Washington’s message to Israel was clear: The need to maintain the Gaza ceasefire and avoid any action that could reignite tensions.
‘Despite Exceptions’
Vance also addressed the situation in Gaza, affirming that both Hamas and Israel are respecting the ceasefire “despite some exceptions.”
He made clear that “the United States would not deploy American soldiers in the Gaza Strip,” reaffirming Washington’s commitment to maintaining the ceasefire and advancing reconstruction.
According to Vance, reconstruction efforts would begin in areas “free of Hamas,” but he cautioned that it was still too early to launch large-scale rebuilding. He added that the United States hoped to see the reconstruction of Rafah “within two or three years.”
On October 9, Hamas and Israel agreed to a ceasefire and prisoner exchange following indirect negotiations in Sharm El-Sheikh under US sponsorship and mediation by Qatar, Egypt, and Turkiye according to The Palestine Chronicle.
The Americans, both the Biden and Trump administrations, gave the Israelis two years to destroy Hamas in Gaza. This is what the leader of the Palestinian National Initiative Dr Mustapha Al Barghouti started by saying. So for them the time was up came 7 October, 2025.
He maintained that it was because they couldn’t finish the job, the White House acted swiftly, stating enough is enough, the war on Gaza must end. What he said its true because today, the quest to end the war on the enclave and let the aid trucks in is an American initiative, who are almost dragging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu forward who doesn’t want to end the war.
In a sharp analysis, the Palestinian politician said the Americans, especially President Donald Trump came to realize that the Israelis were not going to destroy Hamas despite the mass destruction of the Gaza Strip through mass weapons supplied by the United States. And that this is when the Trump administration decided to act and enforce the present, albeit fragile ceasefire between Tel Aviv and Hamas and according to him, ending the bloody, destructive, heinous war on Gaza.
But it was not for the lack of trying. When Trump entered the White House in January 2025, he then tried to sell the Rivieria Gaza idea to the region but he finally realized the Palestinian people of Gaza couldn’t be driven out of their homeland, even if it was just temporarily as he claimed and that there was going to be no way of parcelling them out to other countries.
Dr Barghouti pointed out Trump tried very hard talking to states like Indonesia, in the Arab world and those in Africa, seeking all sorts of pressure to persuade them to take the Gazans. But after much diplomatic chitchat, he realized the Palestinians weren’t for moving despite the fact that 250,000 of them were killed and/or injured at the hands of the Israeli army and the horrific mass destruction of their homeland.
This proves that the idea the Palestinian population can be ethnically cleansed – much talk about that in the past two years of the genocide – was a non-starter and that 1948 when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were driven off their land by Israeli militias and terror gangs was not going to be repeated. Dr Barghouti added the last onslaught on Gaza has proved that ethnic cleansing has become a “closed chapter”.
And he added Trump and his team led by Steve Witkoff and Gerard Kushner became aware of that, and that is when it was decided to push for a ceasefire to save Israel from itself. Barghouti putted this way: Trump realized many countries of the world were turning against Israel because of its murderous actions on Gaza and its mass displacement and starvation of the people of the enclave and to let Netanyahu have his own way by refusing to stop the war would be detrimental to US interests in the region.
Thus when Israel tried to re-start the war on Gaza last Monday – and a week into the ceasefire – when two of its soldiers were killed in Rafah through lone fighters and which Hamas immediately disavowed, the Trump administration played down the incident in the interest of maintaining the ceasefire accord reached at the beginning of October, 2025.
Trump first dispatched Witkoff and Kushner to Israel with Vice-president JD Vance who followed on a two-day visit in an effort to keep tempers low. Their visit to Israel today is sending a message that the US administration wants the ceasefire to be followed through in the interest of Trump’s 20-point peace plan for the Middle East.
Around $70 billion will be needed to reconstruct Gaza and make it safe after two years of war, UN development experts said on Tuesday, while aid agencies reported that far too little aid is getting in to meet the needs of desperate Palestinians.
At just 41 kilometres long (25.4 miles) and two to five kilometres wide (1.2 to 3.1 miles), few places in the Gaza Strip had been left unscathed by the constant Israeli bombardment before the latest ceasefire came into effect haltingly last Friday.
According to the UN Development Programme Special Representative for the Palestinians, Jaco Cilliers, destruction across the enclave “is now in the region of 84 per cent. In certain parts of Gaza, like in Gaza City, it’s even up to 92 per cent.”
$20 billion needed now
Speaking from Jerusalem, the UNDP’s Mr. Cilliers highlighted the findings of the latest Interim Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (IRDNA) on Gaza by the UN, the European Union and the World Bank, which estimated the damage at $70 billion.
To kickstart the massive operation, some $20 billion will be required in the next three years alone, he told journalists in Geneva.
The UN development agency is present in Gaza alongside humanitarian partners to provide immediate support to the enclave’s 2.1 million people.
This includes providing clean water, emergency employment, medical supplies, solid waste removal and making homes and public spaces safe by clearing rubble potentially hiding unexploded ordnance or the many thousands of missing Palestinians.
“We’ve already removed about 81,000 tonnes. That is about…3,100 truckloads,” Mr. Cilliers explained. “The majority of the debris removal is to provide access to humanitarian actors so that they can provide the much-needed aid and support to the people in Gaza. But we also help with hospitals and other social services that need to be cleared of debris.”
The UNDP official pointed to “very good indications” from potential donors in support of reconstruction from Arab States, but also from European nations and the United States “which has also indicated that they are going to be coming in supporting some of the early recovery efforts”.
Immediate aid essential
Important as reconstruction is for Gaza’s long-term future, UN humanitarians once again clamoured for the Israeli authorities to open all access points into Gaza, after the remaining 20 living Israeli hostages were freed on Monday and Palestinian prisoners were released from Israel.
The development followed the signing of a ceasefire deal between Hamas and Israel signed on Monday evening in Sharm El-Sheikh by US President Donald Trump, and the leaders of Egypt, Qatar and Turkïye.
Earlier on Monday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the release of all living hostages from Gaza, two years since they were among some 250 taken during Hamas-led terror attacks in Israel on 7 October 2023.
Gaza City testimony
Speaking to UN News from Gaza, UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) aid worker Tess Ingram described the story of one family displaced five times by the war:
“I met a family today, Mustafa and Syeda and their children, and they told me that they were among the lucky ones because while Mustafa was pulling rubble out from the building, that is their home, at least he said, we have a home.”
The family was relieved on Monday at the appearance of a water truck, Ms. Imgram told us: “But they live in fear that truck might not turn up today or tomorrow. She also can’t get the medicine she needs and her sons had to walk a really long way today just to buy the basics that she needed to make some bread.
“Families need absolutely everything right now. We need the hundreds of trucks a day that were promised to get into the Gaza Strip.”
On Tuesday, the focus shifted to the transfer from Gaza of all deceased hostages, an extremely difficult process overseen by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). It remains unclear how many deceased hostages will be transferred by Hamas.
“When it comes to the living hostages or Palestinian detainees – and believe me that’s a big issue for us – we actually don’t know, we know that we have to be ready,” said ICRC spokesperson Christian Cardon, adding that the complex search is getting underway today.
In the meantime, needs in Gaza remain enormous and “fluid”, aid teams report, with more than 300,000 Palestinians heading north to Gaza City since Friday, as the ceasefire agreement seemed to hold.
“The enthusiasm that came from the international community, from people on the ground that this was the beginning of the end of all the suffering and things would change rapidly, is just not being reflected on the ground, day in and day out. We are not getting enough aid in,” said UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) spokesperson Ricardo Pires.
The Israeli authorities have agreed to allow 190,000 tonnes of relief supplies into Gaza and UN agencies and their partners are scaling up operations rapidly, but a far greater amount is needed overall, humanitarian agencies including the UN aid office, OCHA, have said repeatedly.
“Of course, we are advocating with everyone, and we were there in Sharm El- Sheikh yesterday as well, with 22 heads of state of government, who we are asking to help us push all buttons you can to get this up and running as soon as possible,” said OCHA spokesperson Jens Laerke.
Aid hub carnage
Aid teams continue to insist that there needs to be a move away from handing out lifesaving supplies from remote areas including non-UN aid hubs that are difficult to reach and where hundreds of Palestinians have been shot or injured.
“Most of the actors – ICRC included – were not able to organize sufficient distribution of aid inside Gaza,” said Mr. Cardon. “And what we’ve seen instead, it’s people coming back from distribution sites being wounded, if not killed, in many instances…It’s about aid coming to the people and not any more people going to the aid,” as reported by UN News.
The Al-Aqsa Flood operation marked a turning point in the modern political history of the Middle East. Its repercussions have gone far beyond the Palestinian and regional arenas, extending to the international system and reshaping the foreign policies of global powers toward the region.
The timing of the operation was particularly significant: it came at a transitional moment in the regional order, in the absence of consensus among international and regional actors on the rules of the game. While a fragile balance of deterrence existed between the so-called “Axis of Resistance”—led by Iran (alongside the Syrian regime, Hezbollah, Shiite political forces in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas and Islamic Jihad)—and Israel, the latter was in the midst of a new phase of regional integration through the Abraham Accords.
Several Arab capitals had already normalized relations, and others were on their way, creating an unprecedented political landscape. This shift coincided with the declining influence of traditional Arab powers such as Egypt, Iraq, and Syria, and the rising centrality of the Gulf states. Many analysts began describing this new configuration as a “New Middle East”: wealthy, economically driven, and detached from historical conflicts—unlike the “Old Middle East,” where entrenched crises defined politics.
Turkey, meanwhile, had entered its own phase of recalibration. Once a champion of the Arab Spring and regional Islamist movements, Ankara sought reconciliation with Arab states, even attempting to restore ties with Bashar al-Assad’s regime (though rebuffed by Damascus), while focusing more narrowly on national security and northern Syria.
On the Palestinian front, Israel had grown complacent toward Gaza, convinced Hamas had no incentive to disrupt the status quo. Tensions, however, were mounting in the West Bank, with small armed groups emerging in places like Nablus, Tulkarm, and Jenin. Within Israeli and Western policy circles, talk was spreading about the prospect of a “mini-state in Gaza” as a substitute for a Palestinian state.
At the international level, President Joe Biden’s administration lacked enthusiasm for either the Abraham Accords or Trump’s “Deal of the Century,” yet it effectively followed the same trajectory: pursuing “regional peace” by integrating Israel into a new economic order and reducing the Palestinian question to daily livelihood concerns—employment, services, and economic relief in Gaza and the West Bank—rather than a political resolution.
The Al-Aqsa Flood and the subsequent two-year genocidal war in Gaza shattered these calculations and fundamentally restructured strategic assumptions. Whether the outcome will ultimately benefit or harm the Palestinian cause remains too complex to assess in simple terms, but what is clear is that the pre-October 7 regional order no longer exists.
From a Palestinian perspective, the conflict has restored international attention to the cause, leading to a renewed recognition of its centrality. In the Gulf, the previously dominant security paradigm—which cast Iran as the chief threat while framing Israel as a potential partner—collapsed entirely. A new consensus has emerged: Gulf security is inseparable from the Palestinian issue, and the notion of Israel as a “strategic friend” has been critically reassessed.
Skeptics may argue that these shifts have not altered the balance of power on the ground, and they are partially correct. Yet the strategic narrative has changed. Before October 7, the trajectory was toward the erasure of the Palestinian cause (closing UNRWA, moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, normalization, and de facto annexation of the West Bank). Today, there is growing recognition—regionally and internationally—that Israeli policies themselves are the root of instability, not Iran or other regional actors. As Emirati political scientist Abdulkhaleq Abdulla put it on X (September 25): “When weighing who poses a greater threat to Gulf security and regional stability—Iran or Israel—the evidence points clearly to Israel. Israel’s brutal behavior has made it more dangerous than an exhausted Iran. The Gulf needs a new defensive and geopolitical strategy for the Middle East beyond Iran.”
Israel, however, now perceives a surplus of power and is pressing for a new political and security order that extends beyond the occupied territories. With the partial unraveling of the Iranian alliance and the breakdown of the “Syrian corridor” that once linked Tehran to the Mediterranean, Israel has set its sights on even more ambitious goals, including the proposed “David Corridor” and establishing buffer zones around its borders in Syria, Lebanon, and Gaza.
In response, a tentative regional coalition has begun to take shape, bringing together Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Qatar, with notable support from Turkey and Pakistan. The latter signed a defense pact with Saudi Arabia following Israel’s strike on Qatar and has since become more engaged in regional diplomacy. While fragile and constrained, this alignment presents a rare historic opportunity to rebuild a regional balance of power and establish a new deterrence framework.
Another striking development is the shift in Europe’s stance toward Israel. For the first time, Israel has lost significant ground in Western public opinion and media narratives, particularly among younger generations and in universities. This has pushed Israel closer to isolation—a position from which former U.S. President Donald Trump had tried to rescue it through his proposed Gaza peace plan, which was largely about securing U.S. and Israeli interests, without offering real guarantees for Palestinian statehood or ending the occupation.
In conclusion, it is still too early to judge the full strategic consequences of the Al-Aqsa Flood and the war in Gaza. Scenarios remain open, and outcomes uncertain. Yet one thing is indisputable: the region today is no longer what it was before October 7.
Abu Rumman is an Academic Advisor of the Politics and Society Institute and Professor of Political Science in The University of Jordanand published this article in The Jordan Times.
Dr Khairi Janbek
CrossFireArabia
