In a dramatic reorientation of U.S. Middle East policy, former President Donald Trump has reemerged on the global stage with a bold diplomatic agenda—one that breaks sharply from the historically unwavering U.S.-Israel alliance. His recent moves suggest that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can no longer count on Washington’s unconditional backing, signaling a seismic shift in a relationship that has defined American foreign policy for decades.
Trump’s renewed engagement with the region is being hailed by some as strategic realignment and condemned by others as geopolitical gamble. His approach centers on forging powerful economic partnerships with Arab Gulf states, rekindling dialogue with longtime adversaries like Iran and Syria, and controversially proposing a U.S.-led redevelopment of Gaza. For Netanyahu, the message is clear: Israel must align with broader regional goals—or risk being sidelined.
Trump’s New Middle East Vision
Trump’s new doctrine for the Middle East pivots away from ideological loyalty and toward transactional diplomacy. During a whirlwind tour of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, Trump secured over $700 billion in trade and infrastructure deals, positioning the U.S. as a key economic stakeholder rather than a military overseer.
Noticeably absent from the tour was Israel. Trump’s choice to bypass Jerusalem—a staple in past presidential visits—was seen by many as a signal that Israel would no longer be the automatic center of American Middle East engagement. Instead, his focus appears to be on unifying Arab nations under an economic and security framework that excludes both Iran and Israel, unless they conform to broader regional priorities.
This new paradigm has raised eyebrows across the foreign policy spectrum. Analysts describe it as “America First 2.0”—a philosophy that places American economic interests above traditional alliances, and where loyalty must be earned, not presumed.
A Transactional Approach to Regional Diplomacy
At the core of Trump’s Middle East pivot is a shift from ideological commitment to transactional relationships. He is offering Arab states access to U.S. defense technologies, trade incentives, and diplomatic support in return for economic investment and regional cooperation.
This approach has been welcomed in Gulf capitals. Leaders in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi see Trump’s vision as pragmatic, lucrative, and more aligned with their modernization agendas. Gone is the rhetoric of “good versus evil” that has long shaped U.S. policy in the region. In its place is a strategy driven by money, mutual interest, and geopolitical leverage.
For Israel, however, the transactional model presents challenges. Netanyahu’s hardline policies on Palestine and Gaza, previously tolerated under past U.S. administrations, now risk obstructing broader diplomatic goals. Trump’s new direction requires regional harmony—a goal increasingly difficult to achieve if Israel continues aggressive settlement expansions and military operations in Gaza.
Netanyahu’s Diminishing Influence
Prime Minister Netanyahu, long considered a political ally of Donald Trump, now finds himself on uncertain ground. While Trump previously moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, those gestures appear to be part of a past era. The current tone is far less accommodating.
Sources close to Trump’s team suggest the former president has grown frustrated with Netanyahu’s rigid stance on Gaza and his rejection of regional compromise. With Trump seeking to broker normalization between Arab states and Israel’s adversaries, Netanyahu’s opposition has become a liability rather than a leverage point.
The fallout is becoming increasingly public. Netanyahu has criticized Trump’s outreach to Iran and his proposed ceasefire with Yemen’s Houthis, calling them threats to Israel’s security. Trump, in response, has dismissed Netanyahu’s concerns as obstructionist, suggesting that the Israeli leader must either “get on board or get out of the way.”
Controversial Gaza “Freedom Zone” Plan
Perhaps the most divisive component of Trump’s new Middle East doctrine is his proposal to convert the Gaza Strip into a U.S.-administered “freedom zone.” According to leaked reports, the plan would involve relocating Gaza’s 2 million residents to adjacent zones in Egypt or Jordan, rebuilding the area with international investment, and transforming it into a model of free-market development.
The idea has been met with fierce international criticism. Human rights organizations have labeled the proposal as ethnic cleansing in disguise, while regional powers warn it could destabilize the entire region. Even some in Israel have distanced themselves from the plan, fearing global backlash and a collapse of diplomatic relations with key allies.
Netanyahu has expressed cautious support for the initiative, but Trump’s framing of the plan as a unilateral U.S. operation has further eroded Israeli confidence. If implemented, the Gaza proposal could redefine not only the geography of the Palestinian territories but also the moral standing of all involved parties.
