The United States finds itself seemingly in a state of perpetual conflict, yet declared peace. A headline reads ‘The Twelve-Day War is finished.’ However, Israel remains engulfed in battle. An alarming number of fifty-thousand Palestinians have tragically lost their lives. These represent the lesser-discussed battles. Meanwhile, a lethal drone strike has been carried out by Hezbollah. Numbed from the confluence of conflict, one is left wondering, exactly how many wars are we entangled in?
This phase of war has been the most catastrophic for Israel in terms of the death toll. The Trump administration’s choice to launch airstrikes against Iran draws further attention. Similarly, strikes against Houthi targets have been carried out. Furthermore, the reign of the Assad regime over Syria has been brought to a conclision. Amid the chaos, it’s hard to ascertain who has their hand on the steering wheel of these manoeuvres, casting doubt on the competence of those in charge.
If we take a step back, the grand panorama of geopolitics reveals a deeply altered Middle East, unlike the region familiar to us over the past few decades. Amid the destruction, an unlikely figure emerges, capable of putting a halt to the incessant bombings, mitigating famine, disrupting the cycle of death, and leading the path towards peace. This figure happens to be none other than Donald Trump.
Trump’s stronghold over a transformed Middle East has allowed him to broker peace, charting a different course from his predecessors. Though it seems counter-intuitive, he appears to be a beacon of hope for peace in the war-torn region. However, to make significant strides, he must avoid repurposing the classic, ineffective strategies of those before him, who paradoxically campaigned for peace while actively engaging in war.
This contradiction lies in the previous administrations that called for harmony, yet launched invasions, ousted established leaders, agitated communities with drones and bombings, and flooded the region with weaponry. Just as one can’t pour oil onto flames to douse them, one cannot expect to foster peace while instigating conflict. Addressing Israel, Trump brought promise to end the war and vowed to keep the US devoid of fresh battlefronts. Indeed, he successfully facilitated a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas.
In marked contrast to precedent, Trump has proven to be the first US president in recent generations to refrain from unquestioningly supporting Israel. The original approach of Trump bore promise, despite the divergence that followed. He proposed moving all Palestinians out from Gaza, before launching strikes on Iran. These strikes, while militarily resounding, resulted in further complications.
Ramifications aside, can Trump manage to redirect the course now? Examining the issue realistically, trying to address each problem singly is an impractical approach. Yet, as strange as it may sound, Trump must attempt to address these issues in a comprehensive package deal. A deal that he refers to as the ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’. He requires a holistic rebalance, not just piecemeal solutions.
To illustrate the gravity of the situation, let’s first consider a hypothetical scenario of a fully escalated regional war. Then, we can delineate three plausible steps that Trump could employ to not only establish radical peace, but potentially earn himself the coveted accolade he frequently brings up – the Nobel Peace Prize.
The Middle East is a complex network of players. To understand the proposed solution, focus needs to be placed on four key actors: The Israelis, the Palestinians, the Iranians, and the Saudis. Their fears and mistrust of one another contribute significantly to the surge of violence. Israelis live in fear of attacks by Palestinian militias, while Palestinians worry about an indefinite Israeli occupation. Israel perceives a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, and conversely, Iran sees Israel’s potent military and its alliance with the U.S. as their existential menace. Saudi Arabia shares a rivalry with Iran, despite being another U.S. ally.
These conflicts do not, however, make Saudi Arabia a friend of Israel. In fact, Saudi Arabia refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of Israel until the latter establishes a feasible plan for Palestinian statehood. Israel’s lack of action on this issue has resulted in a deadlock. For years, the region has been trapped in a state of ensnared threats. At present though, Israel holds the upper hand, effectively vanquishing its adversaries — Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.
The grim potential outcomes, if Israel’s offensive does not cease, could include genocide in Gaza, war with Iran, disastrous regime changes, unmanageable migration crises, and even the prospects of nuclear warfare. These represent the most catastrophic possibilities. Can Donald Trump, then, navigate a path to avoid these pitfalls? A comprehensive strategy involving three interrelated ‘deals’ might hold the answer.
These deals, while complex in their formulation and execution, are worth exploring for their core principles. Their efficacy lies in their ability to address the root fears of the involved parties. The first deal seemingly promises a smoother negotiation process, as Iran, debilitated by its weakened defense and economic strains, cannot afford to decline.
Israel, having inflicted significant damages to Iran’s auxiliary terrorist networks and its air defenses, has forced Iran into a precarious position. Economic misery coupled with the threat of an imminent attack should they attempt to create a nuclear weapon, puts Iran in a checkmate. As such, Iran may well be compelled to discard its nuclear aspirations to earn relief from crippling US sanctions.
However, as long as Israel perpetuates aggression towards the Palestinians, neither Saudi Arabia will concede recognition to Israel, nor will Iran cease its threats. Thus, the second deal calls upon Israel to cease their actions against Palestinians. Trump can negotiate a cease-fire in Gaza with the agreement of providing weapons to Israel only in the absence of conflict. Consequently, negotiations with Palestinians can proceed.
The establishment of initial trust between the Israelis and Palestinians could pave the way for a third significant agreement. Trump’s longstanding goal—peace between Saudi Arabia and Israel—could finally be realized. Key obstacles have remained the Saudi demands that Israel recognize a path to statehood for the Palestinians and that the US offer more military protection due to fears of Iran. Yet, if Iran’s atomic program were dismantled under Deal 1, and Israeli-Palestinian talks initiated under Deal 2, these demands could be satisfied, enabling Deal 3.
Thus, through the momentum of three deals, Trump could foster safer environments for all parties involved. A perfect solution might be elusive, but this strategy introduces a well-founded stability and disrupts the cyclic violence. Negotiating these deals requires Trump to maintain a strictly transactional approach. In reciprocation, they provide opportunities for the governments and Trump to make significant economic gains. While not a total solution, these deals serve as an initial step towards much-needed change in the Middle East. Creating a harmonious Middle East would not only stimulate trade and tourism but also facilitate personal connection among people on a human level. If Donald Trump manages to break this cycle of violence, maybe it would be worth giving him the Nobel Peace Prize. After all, individuals have certainly won the prize for less remarkable achievements.
The post Unveiling Donald Trump’s Potential Play to Peace in Middle East appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
