Qamar Bashir Macomb, Michigan, USA
President Donald J. Trump’s return to office in January 2025 triggered swift, sweeping action.
Armed with the same defiance and unfiltered confidence that defined his first term, Trump immediately reimposed the America First doctrine, introducing tariffs and demanding stricter compliance from allies. Predictions of economic collapse, rising inflation, and diplomatic backlash flooded the media. But within six months, reality tells a different story: the U.S. economy is gaining strength, international alliances are being redefined, and old taboos—particularly around America’s unconditional support for Israel—are being questioned as never before.
Recent economic data shows a striking rebound. According to the June 2025 jobs report, the U.S. added 139,000 private sector jobs in May alone, exceeding expectations for the third consecutive month. Unlike the previous two years, when foreign-born workers accounted for much of the labor force growth, the gains since January have been entirely among native-born Americans. Key industries such as leisure and hospitality, construction, and transportation are experiencing consistent growth, while private sector job creation stands at 99.8% of total employment expansion—marking a decisive shift away from government-led hiring trends under the previous administration.
Wage growth is equally notable. Real average hourly earnings have increased by nearly 4% over the past year, with real disposable personal income rising at an annualized rate of 7.5%—a sharp contrast to the 2.3% pace during President Biden’s final year. Inflation has cooled, with the May 2025 CPI showing a year-over-year increase of just 2.4%, the lowest in recent memory. Meanwhile, falling gas prices and stable food costs have contributed to rising consumer confidence. The Nasdaq Composite reached a record high of 20,273 points in late June, driven by renewed optimism in the technology sector and AI-driven investments.
Yet, this domestic optimism is set against a complex and evolving foreign policy backdrop. In April, a 12-day exchange of missile strikes between Israel and Iran raised fears of a broader war. Though conflict was narrowly avoided, the global response—particularly in Europe—marked a turning point. For the first time in decades, the European Union began publicly signaling discomfort with Israel’s conduct in Gaza. The European Council, in its official conclusions dated June 26, 2025, called for an immediate ceasefire and expressed alarm at the dire humanitarian situation. It also acknowledged that Israel may be violating human rights obligations under its existing EU trade agreement. Separately, 17 out of 27 EU member states have supported initiating a formal review of the EU–Israel Association Agreement—a move that underscores rising European frustration with Israel’s military policies.
These developments represent a profound shift in the EU’s position. While not formalized through a European Parliament resolution, the coordinated statements by EU leaders and ministers signal an emerging consensus across the continent. No longer content to follow Washington’s diplomatic lead, Europe is carving out its own space—politically, economically, and morally. This divergence has been accelerated by Trump’s aggressive demands that NATO countries not only increase defense spending to 5% of GDP but also prioritize the purchase of U.S.-manufactured arms. While this has bolstered the U.S. defense industry, it has strained alliances and created room for greater European independence in foreign policy decisions.
In the United States, debates over Israel’s actions have intensified. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced two resolutions—one to suspend military aid to Israel, the other to impose economic sanctions in response to what he described as collective punishment of civilians in Gaza. Both were overwhelmingly defeated in Congress, gaining only 15 and 20 votes respectively. Sanders blamed the pro-Israel lobbying establishment, arguing that most lawmakers fear political retaliation for any stance that challenges the Israeli government. Although President Trump did not endorse these measures, his administration has allowed such debates to surface without obstruction—a contrast to the traditionally unified bipartisan defense of Israel in past decades.
At the local level, symbolic shifts are also taking place. The election of Zoran Mamdani, a progressive Muslim, as mayor of New York City was a milestone. Mamdani’s unapologetic criticism of Israeli airstrikes and his pledge not to host Prime Minister Netanyahu in the city represent a growing undercurrent of opposition, particularly among younger, urban voters. These sentiments, once considered fringe, are increasingly part of mainstream political discourse.
Despite these changes, Trump’s approach to Israel has remained tactically cautious. He has not imposed sanctions or formally suspended aid, but he has made rare and significant public criticisms of Israel’s conduct. He openly expressed frustration when Israel violated a ceasefire that his administration had helped broker, signaling a clear deviation from traditional U.S. deference to Israeli actions. Now, with growing international condemnation of Israel’s military operations—characterized by many as genocidal and ethnically targeted—the moment is ripe for decisive American leadership.
European allies have begun distancing themselves from Israel, and public opinion within the United States has shifted dramatically in favor of a two-state solution. Increasingly, Americans are rejecting unconditional support for Israeli policies and calling for a just and lasting peace.
In this climate, Trump possesses both the leverage and the opportunity to use his influence to bring the involved parties—Israel, the Palestinian leadership, and regional stakeholders—toward a viable two-state solution. Such a move could restore hope to the Middle East, break the cycle of violence and displacement, and lay the foundation for long-term stability and prosperity across the region, benefiting not only those directly affected but also the broader global community.
Domestically, Trump’s approval ratings have benefited from the perception of economic strength. With job creation up, wages climbing, and inflation under control, even some of his skeptics acknowledge the effectiveness of his economic management. At the same time, his reluctance to intervene forcefully in foreign conflicts has earned him rare support from both anti-war conservatives and segments of the progressive left.
Six months into his second term, Trump has demonstrated that shock and disruption, when channeled effectively, can yield both economic and political gains. However, the defining challenge of his presidency may still lie ahead.
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is deepening, and the chorus of global voices demanding justice is growing louder. If Trump chooses to leverage America’s unparalleled influence to mediate peace and push for a two-state solution, he could reshape not only his legacy but the trajectory of the Middle East. If he fails to act, the current window for diplomatic progress may close, leaving future generations to reckon with the consequences.
As 2025 unfolds, the defining test of Trump’s leadership may not be measured in job numbers or trade balances, but in whether he can guide the world’s most powerful nation toward a more balanced and just role in global peace building. With public opinion aligned, Europe asserting independence, and Israel under scrutiny, the opportunity is not only present—it may be historic.
