Trump, Gaza and The New Political Ploy


Dr Sami Al-Arian

The infamous 19th-century imperialist and racial supremacist, Cecil Rhodes, once remarked: “It is our duty to seize every opportunity to acquire more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race.” He then added: “Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited by the most despicable specimens of human beings, what an alteration there would be if they were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence.”

More than a century later, US President Donald Trump expressed similar attitudes during his meeting on Feb. 4, with the Israeli prime minister and indicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, when he said: “We will take over the Gaza Strip, will own it long-term and will redevelop it … I do see a long-term ownership position.” In a settler-colonialist spirit, Trump callously continued, “I don’t think people should be going back to Gaza. I think that Gaza is not a place for people to be living.” He neglected to mention, of course, the exception for Jewish settlers in prime real estate along the Gaza beach. He then added, “They’re living in hell,” without any hint of irony, considering the 15-month US-sponsored genocide, supported by funds, bombs, and diplomatic protection.

Strategic agenda and regional dynamics

There were many items on the agenda between Trump and Netanyahu, including Iran’s nuclear program, the future of Gaza and the West Bank, and normalization with Saudi Arabia.

To be sure, Trump was not an unknown quantity. In his first term, he demonstrated total hostility towards the Palestinians and embraced the most radical positions espoused by extremist Zionists. These included recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocating the US Embassy there, the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights (occupied by Israel since 1967), the closure of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) office in Washington, DC, ending all humanitarian aid to the Palestinians through the UN refugee agency (UNRWA) or US agencies, and integrating Israel within US Central Command (CENTCOM), the US military command responsible for a region stretching from Egypt to Afghanistan.

Furthermore, throughout his presidency Trump completely disregarded the so-called two-state solution — a long-touted US goal — in favor of Netanyahu’s approach of normalizing relations with Washington’s Arab client regimes while pursuing an aggressive settlement expansion policy intended to establish a de facto Greater Israel. In effect, it appears that “Trump 2.0” is trying, in his own way, to fulfill his promises of securing a greater Israel for his right-wing Zionist donors [1], benefactors [2] and appointees [3]. The proposal to forcefully remove over 2 million Palestinians from Gaza does not appear serious or achievable, since the Palestinians will never cooperate in their own displacement, nor would neighboring countries be willing to support a dangerous plan that would destabilize the region. In the past, Trump proposed similar hyperbolic ideas that failed to materialize, including his calls [4] for constructing a Riviera on the beaches of North Korea.

Netanyahu came to the White House with several objectives in mind. He sought Trump’s support to continue his war of extermination in Gaza after freeing many Israeli captives at the end of the first stage of the ceasefire deal. His political allies pressured him to resume the war in order to achieve his elusive objective of dislodging Hamas and eradicating the resistance — an aim he has not accomplished during the 15-month onslaught. It would appear that Trump wants to achieve this goal using political means through his outrageous proposal rather than through military pressure. If that is the case, this would be Trump’s way of handing Netanyahu the fig leaf he needs to silence his hard right critics and conclude the second stage of the ceasefire deal.

On Iran, Trump has doubled down on his policy of applying extreme pressure through economic sanctions in order to get the Iranians to negotiate a deal on their nuclear program. In return, the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has called [5] for “maximum wisdom” to be applied to relations between Washington and Tehran, instead of the “maximum pressure” policy Trump has espoused. Since these are the early stages of diplomatic maneuverings, it’s very doubtful that Netanyahu received a green light from Trump to use military strikes against Iran in the near term.

On the West Bank, the Zionist regime has been escalating its aggressive settlement policy as well as its unprecedented attacks on several Palestinian cities, particularly against refugee camps in Jenin, Nablus, Tobas and Tulkarem.

Towards a Saudi-Israeli accord and its fallout

In the past, Trump and many of his administration officials, such as the new US ambassador to the Zionist regime, Mike Huckabee, have endorsed the expansion of Israeli settlements and the calls for annexing large parts of the West Bank. But backing such a policy now will certainly impede the central piece of Trump’s main objective in the region, which is to conclude a normalization deal with Saudi Arabia. To negotiate a deal with the Saudis, Trump must rein in Netanyahu and his extremist allies by promising them what they desire most: a Gaza free not only of Hamas’ rule but also of Palestinians, as well as the annexation of a large part of the West Bank, in exchange for a normalization deal with the Saudis and possibly beyond.

The Israelis certainly know that they will not get the Palestinians to leave voluntarily when they could not compel them to do that through their genocidal war. They recognize that they cannot unilaterally annex parts of the West Bank before the normalization deal with the Saudis is concluded. They also know that Trump has a very long agenda, both domestically and internationally, particularly with regard to the Ukraine war and China, and will not allow a devastating war with Iran to disrupt his agenda. Once the fog of the visit clears, it will become apparent that Trump’s primary policy in the Middle East is to cement a Saudi-Israeli agreement, one that cannot be finalized without putting a hold on other contentious issues such as a military escalation with Iran, West Bank annexation, or the resumption of the Gaza genocide. But that does not mean that the Zionist regime and its supporters within the Trump administration will not push hard to achieve all their objectives in Gaza, the West Bank and against Iran. Regardless, the Palestinians and their supporters worldwide must be vigilant to resist and defeat all their nefarious plans, particularly in Gaza, the West Bank, as well as any plans to integrate a genocidal regime in the region.

People across the Middle East have witnessed the true colors of the Zionist regime. Achieving a normalization deal with the Saudis or any other party would require nothing less than the total erasure of their collective memory. It would appear that the main lesson of the Oct. 7 attacks has not been learned. They took place at a time when regional and international actors had all but buried the Palestinian cause and ignored the plight of the Palestinians in pursuit of their own interests. Not only will none of the policies advanced by Trump address these issues, but they will exacerbate them. And thus, like his forgotten deal of the century, these policies are doomed to fail.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/25/us/politics/miriam-adelson-trump-israel.html

[2] https://www.thejc.com/news/usa/from-jared-kushner-to-miriam-adelson-meet-the-jewish-figures-in-trumps-inner-circle-sllz2ky1

[3] https://www.palestinechronicle.com/from-stefanik-to-hucabee-donald-trumps-cabinet-is-a-pro-israel-swamp/

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-iTikGb-CY

[5] https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2025/02/06/irans-foreign-minister-calls-for-maximum-wisdom-in-response-to-trumps-maximum-pressure-tehran-policy/

Dr Sami Al Arian is public affairs professor and the director of the Center for Islam and Global Affairs at Sabahattin Zaim University in Istanbul.

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

World Cup, Wimbledon Kicks: Flags, Nepotism, Red Cards and a Watermelon!

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

For a change I would like to give credit to President Trump’s, latest attempt to support the American team before facing off Belgium’s team on July 6, when the day before, and despite his tight and loaded schedule, he called “his friend” Gianni Infantino, FIFA’s President, and asked him for a second look at the punishment against the American striker Folarin Balogun, who made a foul against a Bosnia-Herzegovina player in the match they played earlier on July 2, and which the US won 2-0.

FIFA regulations stipulate that when a player gets a red card during a match for an offense he makes against the other team, he should be suspended from playing in the following match! Mr. Infantino obliged and lifted the ban against the American player. But the match against Belgium in which Balogun played was won by Belgium 4-1.

This intervention episode by Trump on behalf of the American national soccer squad did not end there and led to a controversy that would not be settled before the closing of the 32nd round of the current international tournament.

Infantino was criticized by many within and outside the FIFA body and was asked to resign his post as head of this huge powerful organization. In brief, this episode shows that behind the broad smiles and nice words, sits a huge monster of nepotism and even possible corruption!

Also it means that sports, as a human “noble” endeavor, is not immune from certain uncouth and loath viruses that can affect and may shatter the dreams of other less resourceful nations!

Then we have the phenomenon of waiving national flags when a team wins a match. This occasion is ceased by some staff of the winning teams and players to demonstrate their support for a certain political or human cause or admiration of a person. This is exactly what Hossam Hassan, head-coach of the Egyptian team did when his players defeated Australia on July 3 as they scored 4 goals against Australia which scored only 2 goals, in the final shootout play of the match.

Coach Hassan came down to the pitch and waived the Palestinian flag in a sign of support for the Palestinians in beleaguered Gaza, which celebrated Egyptian performance at the tournament. Israel protested this solidarity gesture with Palestinians and labeled it as anti-Semitic, but FIFA officials maintained that flags belonging to FIFA members, (including Palestine) are allowed to be waived on this occasion!

On the other side of the Atlantic, and in London to be precise, another major sports event is underway, known as the Wimbledon grand slam championship. Wimbledon is known for its strict rules starting with the must-wear white attire, by all players and staff!

On June 29, the Turkish Tennis player, Zeynep Sonmez, ranked 51 by WTA, defeated American player Ann Li 2-1. Sonmez wanted to waive a sign of support for the Palestinians, but could not and according to Jamie Baker, the Wimbledon Tournament Director: “Wimbledon rules do not allow political massaging from players”!

So, what does Ms. Zeynep Somez do?! She sticks a small rubber shock absorber to her racket in a shape of a watermelon composed of the four colors of red, white, black and green! To that subtle demonstration, the Wimbledon people could not raise a finger or blow a whistle!

In this regard, other sources insisted that some people among the audience waived the Israeli which was received by a blind eye!

So next time I attend an important tournament or watch it on TV, I will keep my eyes open on tactics and kicks of this sort, which actually might add to the fun of watching!

Continue reading
New York: AIPAC Stranglehold No More !

By James J. Zogby

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has long held sway in elections, threatening and intimidating any opposition. When a critic of Israel was defeated, they boasted of victory as a lesson for others. In last week’s Democratic primary elections in New York City, three insurgent critics of Israeli policies defeated AIPAC-endorsed candidates, pointing to the potential end of an era for the pro-Israel lobby.


AIPAC’s approach to politics and elections was smart. Formed by the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, they were connected from the outset to an impressive national network of American Jewish leaders, activists, and donors they used to effectively influence members of Congress to embrace pro-Israel positions.

They’d visit elected officials in Washington seeking endorsements of legislation and enlist local leaders in a congressperson’s district to make the pitch.

They’d have local representatives offer to help write new candidates’ Middle East policy positions. Implicit were the promise of support if the official or candidate did what was asked—and the threat of opposition if they didn’t.

AIPAC also spawned a network of PACs—political action committees—to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to distribute for or against candidates depending on their positions on Israel.

Strategic in their operations, not everyone benefited from AIPAC’s largesse.

Chairs of important congressional committees and very supportive congressmembers facing tough reelections received bundled contributions. When elected officials repeatedly stepped out of line, their opponents would benefit from PAC monies and bundled contributions from individual pro-Israel donors.

Overall, the amounts were not overwhelming but sufficient to send a message. When an election went their way, the lobby would crow about the victory, whether or not their support had been a factor. Their goal was communication: “Fear us, or you too can be defeated.”



With the end of federal oversight of independent election expenditures, AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups created “super-PACs” to raise and spend tens of millions of dollars each cycle. In 2022 and 2024, they effectively targeted a few candidates critical of Israel and spent millions to defeat them.

After Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, we’ve witnessed a dramatic collapse of public support for Israel—especially among Democrats. AIPAC can no longer make examples of just a few candidates, with well over 100 electeds now critical of Israel. Add to this that AIPAC has become so toxic they’ve been forced to create new entities or rely on alternates to distribute funds to candidates.

Meanwhile, Israel’s behaviors alienate more voters. And the more money AIPAC spends, the more toxic its brand—even when they win, their heavy-handed tactics lead to declining support.

This brings us to last week’s New York primaries, a turning point in US politics when two prominent pro-Israel members of Congress were defeated by challengers critical of Israeli policies and supporters of Palestinian justice, and a former leader of pro-Palestinian campus protests won an open race. Not only did AIPAC and its allies spend millions and fail, but also these elections were upfront about Israeli policies and Palestinian rights.



A hallmark of pro-Israel groups’ past campaign involvement was the lengths they’d go to not make support for Israel a public issue. They’d raise money from their supporters based on Israel, but their expenditures would pay for ads criticizing a candidate’s age or “radical agenda,” never mentioning the candidate’s position on Israel. In these NY contests, many issues mattered to voters, especially frustration with the Democratic establishment’s failed policies—but they were also about Israel, and voters knew it. 



In predictable reactions from the pro-Israel side, some accused the targeting of AIPAC’s money and influence as unfair or even antisemitic—ignoring decades of AIPAC boasting about its money and influence as the source of its power. Others claimed that with the election’s results, “Jews no longer feel safe in New York,” ignoring that the most prominent contest’s victor is Jewish—a self-proclaimed progressive Zionist who strongly opposed Israel’s genocide against Palestinians. Finally, some desperately attempted to dismiss the entire election as just about New York with no larger significance, ignoring the changed national political landscape as similar contests emerge everywhere. 



The bottom line is that after a half-century AIPAC’s hold over politics has been weakened. It won’t go away anytime soon, but a real debate over US Middle East policy can now take place. Thank you, New York voters

James J. Zogby is president of the Washington-based Arab American Institute  and contributed this article to The Jordan Times

Continue reading

You Missed

Lebanese Media in The Age of Political Conspiracies

  • By marwan
  • July 13, 2026
  • 12 views
Lebanese Media in The Age of Political Conspiracies

Don’t Forget Palestine!

  • By marwan
  • July 13, 2026
  • 11 views
Don’t Forget Palestine!

Israeli Settlements Shoot up!

  • By marwan
  • July 13, 2026
  • 3 views
Israeli Settlements Shoot up!

Mahmoud Darwish: I will live, even if life betrays me and I will dream, even if dreams abandon me

  • By marwan
  • July 13, 2026
  • 8 views
Mahmoud Darwish: I will live, even if life betrays me and I will dream, even if dreams abandon me

Margot Saba Abdo: A Photo Pioneer in Jerusalem

  • By marwan
  • July 12, 2026
  • 10 views
Margot Saba Abdo: A Photo Pioneer in Jerusalem

Mustapha Barghouti: ‘Repression Will Not Deter The Palestinian People’

Mustapha Barghouti: ‘Repression Will Not Deter The Palestinian People’