UNDERSTANDABLY, throughout his election campaign, Donald Trump expressed intentions to conclude military engagements in the Middle East, which, if fulfilled, might be seen as a significant achievement, differentiating his approach from his predecessors. ‘’In a phone call ahead of the election, the president-elect told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to wrap up major military operations in Gaza before Inauguration Day’’. Last week, Trump also spoke with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in a phone call where he expressed his commitment to working toward ending the ongoing conflict in Gaza and promoting peace in the region. While ending the ongoing Gaza war could positively allow Trump to reshape the narrative of the US foreign policy, the veritable truth proclaims that by stopping a genocide-led bloodshed in Gaza, Trump can also rewrite the US history.
Ostensibly, the 47th US President-elect Donald Trump faces a complex foreign policy dilemma in order to choose an historic decision of making an end to the ongoing Israel’s war in Gaza —reflecting an all-out attack on human rights and international law. The Zionist Jews expect that he will be supporting Israel’s military objectives, aligning himself with the current Israeli government’s tough stance while the liberal western governments, including the Muslim world at large, want that he must stop the Gaza genocide to fulfill the arising domestic and international concerns and the calls for global peace.
Moreover, though the Biden Administration has favoured having the war-ravaged territory governed by the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, which administers parts of the West Bank, Netanyahu has rejected that idea and insists on the right for the Israeli military to operate there. Now the question arises, will Trump be successful to devise a strategy —to handle this complex situation given the fact that President Trump who is already accused of favouring Israel (evidenced from his 2017 move of shifting the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem)—to emerge as a real peace broker in the Middle East? Needless to say, in his previous presidential term, Trump reshaped many contours— of US foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, divorcing US traditional approach — vis-à-vis Israel— focused on transactional alliances and showing US hard power propensity towards Iran. By now, his return creates anxiety and perplexity in Arab leaders who are in quest of seeing whether ‘’he will revisit his previous policies, or adjust to the evolving geopolitical landscape’. True, making an end of this war on Israeli terms, will be intrinsically lethal to Middle East Peace.
Further, Trump, who has a Lebanese-American son-in-law, recently posted on the social platform X that as president he would “stop the suffering and destruction in Lebanon.” Needless to say, to improve the US global image, President Trump would likely need to take significant actions to stop the ongoing Gaza war. This would involve not only diplomatic efforts but possibly altering US military support and policies in the region. Foreseeably, Trump needs to realign US strategic interests to pursue broader Mideast peace terms that could address underlying issues and foster lasting stability.
And above all, Trump’s Iran policy is likely to be a central element of his Middle East strategy, particularly in addressing the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Trump’s return to the White House suggests that in his second term, he must pursue a pragmatic US foreign policy vis-à-vis Iran, including the issue of Iran’s nuclear deal (JCPOA), which he previously revoked. Pragmatically, Trump’s White House must adopt a restraint strategy—prompting diplomatic engagements instead of fostering hostility towards Iran.
Additionally, to restore the writ of international law in the light of the actions taken by Netanyahu in Gaza, Trump could leverage diplomatic channels and seek to reinvigorate discussions around international accountability mechanisms. And yet, advocating for negotiations focused on peace and humanitarian actions in Gaza could be a vital step. In this context, restoring dignity-cum-efficacy of international law is central to peace efforts, particularly if Trump were to stop Israel’s brazen international law violations in the region, would require several major steps: Firstly, ensuring that military actions discriminate between combatants and civilians to prevent disproportionate harm, secondly, establishing international protection for Palestinians to safeguard against violence and thirdly, implementing a two-state solution as endorsed by international peace organisations, thereby fostering long-term peace rather than temporary fixes.
Thus, to devise a broad-based peace strategy (albeit not based on Israeli terms,), upholding international law and human rights, fostering trust and dialogue between the conflicting parties by neutralising the impression that he is Israel- fixed, Trump could adopt these necessary measures: 1- Promote a balanced dialogue: Facilitate negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaderships, listening to both sides’ grievances and demands without prioritizing one over the other; 2-Engage regional stakeholders: Involve key regional players with the help of the Arab League and the OIC; 3-Address humanitarian concerns: Focus on immediate humanitarian aid for Gazans to build goodwill, showing a commitment to the welfare of civilians, which could lead to a more conducive environment for peace talks; 4-Reassess military and economic support: Leverage US military and economic support to influence behaviours while ensuring that any conditions placed are fair, promoting stability and peace rather than escalation.
Therefore, Trump must navigate these peace discussions sensitively and remain open to the Middle East peace tapestry, ensuring a constructive dialogue that could pave the way to a sustainable resolution envisaged by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN, Arab-League and the OIC.The currently held OIC-Arab League joint moot in Riyadh (Nov.11) emphasized to hold an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. The moot also called for Israel’s accountability of harrowing war crimes in Gaza, demanding an end to Gaza’s humanitarian crisis and Israel’s respect for Iranian sovereignty.
—The writer, based in Pakistan, an independent IR & International Law analyst, also an expert in Conflict and Peace Studies (with special focus on Palestine, Kashmir), is member of European Consortium of Political Research (ECPR), including the Washington Foreign Law Society/American Society of International Law. He also deals with the strategic issues.
(rizvipeaceresearcher@gmail.com)
