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

A Middle East Whirlpool! View From Amman

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

Unlike the grey terrain of the Middle East, known for its harsh aridity and barren landscapes, the region’s still-unsettled, multi-front conflicts that erupted after the 7 October, 2023 surprise Palestinian assault on Israeli settlements around Gaza Strip, almost literally, become associated in the public imagination with the colour blue: The sea, its waves, its vessels and its strategic waterways.

The Palestinians called that watershed event Al-Aqsa Flood. Israel described 7 October as a second Holocaust. If the Palestinians deliberately chose the word flood for its religious and symbolic connotations, the Israeli way of describing it, indicated how serious and tough their losses and injuries were.

What followed was a succession of milestones and unprecedented developments across the Middle East. They continue to unfold dramatically, resembling the abrupt and unpredictable movements of hurricanes and tempests on the high seas.

Yet the side-conflicts and mini-wars that followed 7 October have neither followed a single pattern nor obeyed the same rules. Instead, events have moved in different, sometimes opposing directions — unlike the orderly circular motion of an actual whirlpool. It is almost as though every confrontation has chosen a course of its own: The predictable alongside the unpredictable, the rational alongside the seemingly illogical.

It therefore takes more than intelligent guesswork or clever political analysis to determine which direction these events will ultimately take, and which may prove more dangerous — not only to the region and its inhabitants, but also to the many international powers with interests at stake.

If we were to capture the current Middle Eastern scene in a single frame, we might portray it as an extraordinary, almost unbelievable collision of man-made tides, currents and sub-currents, all moving simultaneously through one increasingly turbulent sea.

Because the first shots fired on 7th October around Gaza strip, from a Palestinian point of view, came as a last desperate call and reminder of the injustice they are suffering, they soon found their echoes in the four corners surrounding it: In south Lebanon, Yemen to the south and Iraq and Iran to the east. Even to the west, there were international sailors who belonged to the Peace Flotilla, trying to bring medicine and food to the starving children of Gaza!

One of the most significant currents emerged on Israel’s northern front.

What initially appeared to be a relatively “controlled” confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah steadily intensified until September 2024, when Israel killed the party’s leader Hassan Nasrallah. Only a few months later came another geopolitical earthquake: The collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Damascus in December 2024.

Each development sent another powerful current through the already boiling waters of the wider Middle Eastern whirlpool.

Then came an even larger artificial wave.

In June 2025, the United States launched Operation Midnight Hammer, striking Iran’s three principal nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan while diplomatic efforts surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme were still underway.

Washington described the operation as an attempt to inflict decisive damage on Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Tehran responded with retaliatory action against American military interests in the Gulf.

But that was not the end of the storm.

On 28 February, 2026, the world witnessed another major escalation when the United States and Israel launched coordinated, large-scale attacks against Iran. The two allies acted jointly but gave their military campaigns different names: Washington called its operation Epic Fury, while Israel called its campaign Roaring Lion.

The strikes hit Iranian military infrastructure and senior leadership and inflicted substantial damage. Yet they failed to produce one of the most far-reaching political outcomes sought by US-Israeli advocates of the military campaign: The toppling of the Iranian regime.

And so the whirlpool continued.

Iran responded not simply through missiles and military retaliation, but by shifting the struggle towards one of the most strategically sensitive waterways on earth: The Strait of Hormuz.

Through restrictions on shipping, attacks on vessels and increasingly assertive claims over the waterway, Tehran transformed Hormuz into another major front in the confrontation. The strait — through which a substantial share of the world’s energy supplies traditionally passes — became yet another current dragging regional powers and the wider international community deeper into the turbulence.

Here, the metaphor of the whirlpool becomes more than literary.

Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Yemen, Iraq, the Red Sea, the Arabian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz are no longer easily separable theatres. Each produces currents that flow into the others. A military strike in one location generates political pressure somewhere else; an assassination changes the balance of power hundreds of kilometres away; a blocked shipping lane reverberates through global markets thousands of kilometres beyond the Middle East.

And all the while, new currents are being created faster than old ones can disappear.

What begins on the shores of Gaza does not remain in Gaza. What happens in Beirut, Damascus, Tehran or the Strait of Hormuz does not remain there either.

The Middle Eastern whirlpool has become too wide, too violent and too interconnected to contain its turbulence within the region itself.

And as it keeps spinning, its waves will continue to splash far beyond the shores of the Middle East — reaching, sooner or later, virtually every corner of the globe.

Conclusion: As long as the waters surrounding the Middle East remain crowded with warships, missiles, blockades, retaliatory strikes and the debris of foreign intervention, the region’s old whirlpool will continue to spin.

Continue reading
‘No Need For Your Crocodile Tears’
  • HebaHeba
  • August 13, 2026

By Ismail Al Sharif

“I’ll say it frankly: We should have exerted more pressure on Israel to adopt a different approach in Gaza” – Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor to ex-President Joe Biden.

A striking phenomenon is recurring in American politics: Some presidents, cabinet members, and senior officials become more outspoken in their stances toward the Israeli occupation entity after leaving office, expressing regret for decisions that contributed to the injustice inflicted upon the Palestinian people.

This may be due to their liberation from diplomatic and partisan constraints, the pressures of Zionist lobbies, and the influence of tainted money, or perhaps their consciences awaken belatedly as they feel closer to death, realizing the enormity of the injustice they participated in or condoned.

Examples of this are numerous. Among the most prominent is former US President Jimmy Carter, who, after leaving office, shifted from a traditional pro-Zionist rhetoric to criticizing the Israeli occupation and its policies. Then there is Chuck Hagel, former US Secretary of Defense, who held the United States responsible for the Zionists’ continued aggression and described their practices as terrorism— but only after his retirement, of course.

Robert Gates, the former Secretary of Defense, also criticized war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, calling him ungrateful.

More recently, Jake Sullivan, former National Security Advisor, and Antony Blinken, Biden’s lackluster Secretary of State, joined the ranks of those who have expressed regret. Both men have blood on their hands from the blood of Palestinian children and played a shameful role in supporting the Israeli entity during one of the greatest acts of genocide in modern history.

This was revealed in a lengthy investigation published in The New Yorker magazine last 20th July, titled “How Biden Enabled Israel’s Aggression Against Gaza – and Iran,” with the subtitle: “Top officials from the previous Administration now express regret over their failure to rein in Netanyahu.”

However, this regret will not absolve them for they knew full well that the Zionists were committing genocide in Gaza. On 5 March, 2024, five months after the start of the genocide, Mirjana Spoljarić, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), sent a confidential letter to President Biden. The ICRC, in addition to its humanitarian mission, is obligated under the Geneva Conventions to provide states with information and advice to help them avoid committing war crimes.

In her letter, Spoljarić reminded President Biden that the organization had condemned the “horrific” massacre perpetrated by Hamas against Israelis on 7 October 2023 and that it had continued to press the movement “tirelessly” for the release of the “hostages” it was holding.

However, this time she appealed to Biden with “grave concern,” warning that Israel, which had continued to bombard Gaza with heavy munitions since that October, was ignoring the ICRC in an unprecedented manner.

In her letter, she wrote: “The way Israel conducts hostilities is inconsistent with the laws of armed conflict, particularly the obligations to protect civilians, to distinguish between military objectives on the one hand and civilians and civilian infrastructure on the other, to ensure the humane treatment of detainees and the dead, to protect medical facilities and personnel, and to provide and facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid.”

Despite these clear warnings, the United States remained a key partner in the genocide, providing weapons, money, and political and international cover to Israel. And now some of its officials come to shed crocodile tears for the children of Gaza!

I say to them: You have no right to repent now, after all these martyrs, after all these tragedies, to say: “We are sorry, we made a mistake.” You knew, and you had the power to pressure and prevent, but you chose to support, arm, and cover up. You bear the burden of what happened, and the blood of the children of Gaza will haunt you and pursue your names to the dustbin of history.

This piece by Ismail Al Sharif was originally published in the Arabic Addustour daily and reprinted in English in Crossfirearabia.com.

Continue reading

You Missed

Albanese Calls For World Force to Protect Civilians in Gaza, West Bank

Albanese Calls For World Force to Protect Civilians in Gaza, West Bank

40 Million Tons of Rubble: Gaza Ministry Faces Challenges in Removing it

40 Million Tons of Rubble: Gaza Ministry Faces Challenges in Removing it

Join The Queue For The Drops

Join The Queue For The Drops

‘My Way Out of Insanity’

‘My Way Out of Insanity’

The Child, Tree and The Dark

The Child, Tree and The Dark

Palestinian Dr Held Over Social Media Posts Suffers Heart Attack in Israeli Detention

Palestinian Dr Held Over Social Media Posts Suffers Heart Attack in Israeli Detention