Those who believed that US President Donald Trump would emerge as the peace-promoting leader the Middle East has long sought should reconsider in light of the current situation in the Occupied West Bank.
The Israeli army is unleashing devastation in Jenin, seemingly unfazed by 15 months of ongoing conflict, as they witness the striking scene of numerous well-equipped Hamas fighters and vehicles encircling the Red Cross transport that carried the first three Israeli hostages released.
The visuals from the hostage release in Gaza City have left the Israeli public reeling, challenging the prevailing narratives of complete victory. “After a year and four months filled with information and unfounded tales of total triumph and retribution, the Israeli public is confronted with images from Gaza of Toyotas, armed Hamas members, and a city rising from its ruins,” remarked journalist Israel Frey to Middle East Eye.
It is important to note that the extensive ground offensive against the West Bank refugee camps was premeditated. However, its timing was strategically significant in retaining Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s far-right finance minister and the de facto consul general of the occupied West Bank, in the cabinet, especially after he threatened to resign over the ceasefire in Gaza.
Additionally, Smotrich’s agenda included a commitment to overhaul the army leadership.
If you believe that Lt. General Herzi Halevi, Israel’s highest-ranking general who stepped down this week, has taken sufficient action in Gaza to warrant an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC), then his successor will certainly be of interest.
In light of the recent settler assault on the Palestinian town of Funduq, coinciding with Trump’s decision to lift sanctions on the most violent extremist groups, one might conclude that Israel has merely paused its operations in Gaza, only to redirect similar violence towards the West Bank. Within hours, ten bodies were left on the streets of Jenin, too perilous to recover.
Does this indicate that the framework for Trump’s second term has already been established, and is this the shape it will take?
A repetition of the ideal partnership?
The evidence is undeniable: all elements are aligned for a resurgence of the ideal partnership with Israel that Trump cultivated during his first term.
Trump permitted Israel to annex the occupied Golan Heights—a decision likely to provoke future conflict with Syria—leveraged the Abraham Accords to undermine the Palestinian cause, and relocated the US embassy to Jerusalem.
For his second and final term, Trump has appointed Mike Huckabee as ambassador, who denies the existence of a Palestinian identity; Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, who advocates for the construction of a Third Temple on the site of the Al Aqsa mosque; and Steve Witkoff as peace envoy, who proposes relocating Gazans to Indonesia.
Trump has made it abundantly clear that he shows little concern for the plight of seven million Palestinians.
His interest, along with that of his son-in-law Jared Kushner, lies in viewing Gaza as the largest demolition site globally, primarily due to the potential for lucrative beachfront development. “Beautiful things could be done over there, fantastic things,” the president remarked.
However, the well-being of the local population seems to be of no concern to him.
To be fair, Trump’s indifference extends beyond Palestinians to all Arabs, regardless of their wealth. His relationship with Saudi Arabia is primarily transactional, hinging on the financial contributions of Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman.
When reflecting on his first foreign trip, Trump recalled his visit to Riyadh, primarily because Saudi Arabia had committed to purchasing $450 billion in American goods. “I don’t know, if Saudi Arabia wanted to buy another $450 billion, or $500 billion we will put it for inflation,” he stated.
Unaware of the ongoing humanitarian crisis and focused on maintaining authority, Trump surrounds himself with advisors who echo Israel’s most extreme viewpoints. This raises the question: will he once again serve as a convenient ally for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? Is Netanyahu’s strategy truly aimed at preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state before it can even take shape?
The answer is complex. The alliance of Trump with an Israel increasingly influenced by religious Zionism is evident. This ideology holds more sway in Israel today than it did in 2017, no longer relegated to the fringes.
It now plays a significant role in the occupation of the West Bank, influences the border police, and has permeated the upper ranks of the military and judiciary. It has become a voice in Netanyahu’s cabinet that cannot be overlooked and has compelled a Democratic president to respond. The religious Zionist movement rightfully expects unwavering support from the Trump administration.
This is indeed accurate. However, neither Trump nor Netanyahu is operating within the reality they believed they had under control in 2017.
If left unchecked, an unrestrained Israel could pose a significant source of instability in the region, affecting Trump just as it did Biden.
A challenging environment for aging leaders
Netanyahu may have leveraged his brief encounter with Witkoff as a rationale for pursuing a ceasefire that could have been achieved last July, but there are also increasing domestic motivations for this decision now.
On the surface, public opinion polls appear contradictory. Sixty percent of Israelis assert that there are no innocents in Gaza, yet between 60 and 70 percent advocate for an end to the conflict.
This inconsistency stems from a profound lack of empathy towards Palestinians.
The weariness among Israelis is primarily due to the toll the conflict has taken on their own soldiers’ lives, the injuries sustained, the economic impact, and the disruption to their accustomed Western lifestyle, which this generation of Israelis views as their entitlement.
As noted by my colleague Meron Rapoport, the ongoing war has become a significant burden for the government, military, and society at large.
Israeli society is more divided than ever. The weekly protests by families of hostages have intensified pressure on a government that has argued, without success and contrary to all evidence, that only military action could secure the safe return of the hostages.
Internal dissent against an ongoing war has reached unprecedented levels.
The ceasefire in Lebanon did not alleviate the pressure on Netanyahu; rather, it intensified it. As he approaches the midpoint of his current term as Prime Minister, Netanyahu is acutely aware that his political future is at stake if he maintains this course.
Setting aside his accountability for the attacks on October 7, the loss of over 400 soldiers and countless injuries raises the question: for what purpose have they sacrificed their lives, especially if Hamas continues to thrive amidst the devastation in Gaza?
If public sentiment indicates that Israel is fatigued by war, why then is it initiating another conflict in the West Bank and expanding its occupation of Syrian territory beyond what it currently holds in Gaza?
Partial annexation
Netanyahu appears to be astute in his understanding of Washington’s limits.
Trump’s intervention in the Gaza conflict is primarily focused on the Israeli hostages. Once they are returned, or most of them are, Israel may act freely in Gaza or the West Bank.
When asked about the future of the ceasefire while signing executive orders in the Oval Office, Trump remarked, “It’s not our war. It is their war. I am not confident. But I think they’re very weakened on the other side.”
Additionally, the military actions in the West Bank and the replacement of Halevi are necessary to maintain Smotrich’s support. Smotrich has been candid about this, stating that the upcoming period will see a shift in senior military leadership in preparation for a renewed offensive in the Gaza Strip.
Team Trump is closely aligned with efforts in the West Bank aimed at dismantling refugee camps in anticipation of partial annexation.
Elise Stefanik, nominated by Trump for the position of US ambassador to the UN, asserts that Israel holds biblical authority over Judea and Samaria. In her view, Palestinians do not possess rights as a distinct people, nor do they share the same rights as Israelis.
However, it would be shortsighted to reduce Netanyahu’s objectives to this singular focus. He understands that his actions in Jenin will not only lead to the city’s destruction but also undermine the Palestinian Authority, which is already struggling to maintain its existence.
The Authority cannot endure as a mere extension of the Israeli military’s operations in Jenin, Tulkarm, Nablus, and other centers of resistance.
We should anticipate a rise in defections from its armed and trained Preventive Security Force, reminiscent of the Second Intifada.
Netanyahu is acutely aware of this reality.
Israel’s greatest vulnerability
For Netanyahu, the governance framework he envisions for the West Bank mirrors that of Gaza—reverting to a system of individual agreements with local leaders.
Similar to Gaza, the West Bank will be subjected to enduring Israeli military oversight. However, a significant distinction from Trump’s initial term is evident.
Israel has not only alienated an entire generation of American Jews through its actions in Gaza but has also lost the support and sympathy of the broader region, which, as of October 6, appears to have relegated the Palestinian cause to the background.
A new wave of leaders in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates has emerged, showing little concern for the Palestinian issue. Prior to the devastation in Gaza, Israel was on the verge of achieving a decisive victory.
Israel’s tendency to misinterpret the sentiments of its Arab neighbors represents its most significant vulnerability.
The nation has yet to grasp that its military campaign in Gaza has galvanized and mobilized a new generation of Arabs in a way that no previous conflict has in Israel’s tumultuous history.
What could possibly drive a Moroccan to forsake the promise of Green Card permanent residency in the United States, opting instead for the perilous streets of Tel Aviv where death by knife attack looms?
Morocco eagerly embraced the Abraham Accords. What value does that agreement hold now?
Israel appears remarkably detached from its regional context, perceiving its role solely as the dominant force in a contentious environment.
Should Israel proceed with its intentions regarding the West Bank, it risks further radicalizing six million Palestinians in Jordan and countless East Bankers to an unprecedented degree.
The U.S. military, under Trump’s administration, will be compelled to respond, given the multitude of assets and bases in the region that are highly susceptible to the sentiments of the local populace.
Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi has repeatedly cautioned about these repercussions, yet his warnings have gone unheeded. “The West Bank is adjacent to our borders, and the situation is precarious; developments there could jeopardize regional security,” Safadi stated.
Trump will find it impossible to overlook the potential collapse of Jordan if it occurs. Its neighboring countries will also be unable to dismiss the implications. This situation will not merely be “their” issue, but his as well, posing a threat to the entire U.S. military presence in the area.
We are confronted with an American administration that lacks a fundamental understanding of the Palestinian people. They view the region exclusively through an Israeli lens.
This has always been the case, but the current level of narrow-mindedness is more pronounced than ever.
Such a perspective is a formula for disaster, sowing the seeds for future conflicts. The anti-war stance that Trump once championed will soon fade into obscurity.
