As the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, scheduled to commence on
Jan 19, 2025, approaches, it is essential to examine the potential impact of president-elect
Donald Trump on this event and Middle East security.
Considering Trump’s past foreign policy actions, especially
those concerning Israel, alongside the wider geopolitical environment, his
prospective role in shaping the ceasefire and future peace initiatives is
intricate and layered.
Historical influence
Trump’s initial term as president was characterised by a
robust endorsement of Israel, a position that resonated with his domestic
political supporters and simultaneously altered US foreign policy, thereby
impacting the wider dynamics of the Middle East.
Key actions during this period included the formal
acknowledgement of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the transfer of the US
embassy to that city, and the withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement.
These measures solidified his rapport with Israeli
leadership and exemplified his overarching “America First” philosophy in
international relations.
Additionally, the Trump administration facilitated the
Abraham Accords, which established normalised relations between Israel and
various Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco.
This initiative was presented as a significant
transformation towards a more stable Middle Eastern landscape, shifting the
emphasis from the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a broader
framework of regional collaboration, encompassing joint security efforts and
economic partnerships.
Impact on ceasefire
As president-elect, Trump is poised to significantly shape
the dynamics surrounding the ceasefire anticipated this month, even before his
formal inauguration.
His established rapport with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, coupled with his reluctance to engage in multilateral discussions
involving adversarial entities such as Hamas, indicates that his strategy
regarding any prospective ceasefire may markedly diverge from those of his
predecessors.
Historically, Trump’s foreign policy has leaned towards
unilateral or bilateral engagements, emphasising direct negotiations with
principal stakeholders over broader international consensus-building
initiatives.
This distinctive approach could affect both the negotiation
and implementation of the ceasefire.
Given his consistent advocacy for robust support of Israel
in its confrontations with Palestinian groups, Trump may promote a ceasefire
that prioritises Israeli objectives while advocating for minimal concessions
from the Palestinian side.
Furthermore, his policy stance might include enhancing Israel’s security framework, potentially through augmented military assistance or intelligence collaboration, thereby ensuring that Hamas does not gain a favourable position post-ceasefire.
Nevertheless, Trump has also articulated concerns regarding
“endless wars” and military entanglements, particularly in the context of the
Middle East.
Should the ceasefire present a viable pathway for
de-escalation, it is conceivable that Trump would endorse a more limited
American involvement, concentrating on safeguarding Israeli security without
engaging in prolonged military operations.
This shift could lead to a reassessment of US policy in the
region, potentially encouraging other nations to assume roles that the US might
opt to avoid.
The Abraham Accords
The Abraham Accords, recognised as a pivotal achievement in
Trump’s foreign policy, have the potential to significantly reshape security
dynamics in the Middle East, particularly concerning the ceasefire between
Israel and Hamas.
The establishment of normalised relations between Israel and
several Arab nations has introduced new security considerations, prompting some
Arab states to prioritise countering regional threats, such as Iran, and
pursuing economic benefits over their traditional support for Palestinian
factions.
These accords may influence the responses of Arab states to
the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Although there remains considerable public backing for
Palestinian rights across many Arab nations, the emergence of private
partnerships and security collaborations with Israel could empower these states
to apply pressure on Hamas or serve as intermediaries in future discussions.
This evolution may foster a more equitable regional strategy
regarding the conflict, potentially aiding in the long-term stabilisation of
the ceasefire.
Moreover, Trump’s endorsement of these accords could
strengthen the collective stance against Iran, a principal backer of Hamas,
thereby redefining the security framework of the Middle East.
In this light, a ceasefire could be perceived not merely as
a temporary solution to the Israel-Hamas conflict, but as a strategic chance to
realign the region’s security priorities, potentially diminishing the influence
of adversarial entities such as Iran.
The challenges
A ceasefire influenced by Trump may yield a temporary
tactical advantage by ceasing hostilities between Israel and Hamas; however,
its long-term implications for the security dynamics of the region remain
ambiguous.
His policies, particularly his unwavering support for
Israel, have often been perceived as intensifying existing divisions rather
than alleviating the fundamental tensions in the area.
In a wider geopolitical framework, any ceasefire negotiated
under Trump’s auspices is unlikely to tackle essential issues fuelling the
Israel-Palestinian conflict, including the status of Jerusalem, the prospects
for Palestinian statehood, and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
Failing to confront these critical matters may render the
ceasefire a fleeting arrangement, with the potential for renewed violence once
the political impetus for maintaining peace wanes.
Moreover, Trump’s diplomatic strategy, characterised by a mix of unilateral and transactional approaches, could alienate significant international players, such as the United Nations and the European Union, who may perceive his policies as biased or unjust.
This perception could hinder the prospects for a sustainable
resolution and exacerbate regional instability.
Shift in global security dynamics
In the realm of Middle Eastern security, the potential
ramifications of Trump’s leadership on the Israel-Hamas ceasefire may
significantly alter the US’ role as a pivotal actor.
Although his administration frequently emphasised a
reduction in US military engagements overseas, his rhetoric and policies
fostered a perception of unwavering American support for Israel.
As the region grapples with intricate challenges involving
Iran, Syria, and various other regional stakeholders, Trump’s return to power
and his approach to the ceasefire could convey to global powers like China and
Russia that the US continues to wield considerable influence in shaping the
geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.
Conversely, his leadership might also instigate a
reassessment of how regional powers, especially those in the Gulf, align
themselves with international actors.
Should the US maintain its unequivocal backing of Israel,
certain Middle Eastern countries may pursue closer relations with Russia or
China, particularly in the defence and energy sectors.
This shift could result in a reconfiguration of influence,
further complicating the security dynamics within the Middle East.
Conclusion
Trump’s impact on the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, as
well as the overall security framework of the Middle East, is expected to be
significant, especially given his steadfast support for Israel and his proposed
reconfiguration of regional security arrangements.
Although the current ceasefire may offer a brief respite
from hostilities, his approach could either foster temporary stability or
intensify enduring conflicts if fundamental issues are not addressed.
His second term will play a crucial role in determining the security dynamics of the region, with his policies concerning Israel and Palestinian groups likely to shape the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East for the foreseeable future.
Comments