What Does the New American Administration Hold for Our Region?

“Whoever tries the tried is of a ruined mind!” This popular saying aptly sums up what the new American administration, led by Donald Trump, might bring to the region. To understand the future under Trump’s leadership, it’s essential to recognize the circumstances shaping this era and the priorities it will uphold. As always, the overarching concern for America and the West remains the security of “Israel.”

Most analyses draw from Trump’s past relationships with regional leaders until 2019. Trump’s well-known “money and economy” doctrine, focusing on economic gain and financial leverage, will shape the next four years, emphasizing security stability and avoiding direct conflicts. However, the West’s main priority remains safeguarding the Zionist entity. A recent incident in Amsterdam serves as an example: Dutch citizens confronted a group of “Israelis” who tore down and ripped the Palestinian flag. Media reports suggest that Mossad had a role in inciting this incident to reinforce the idea of the ever-present danger of “anti-Semitism” and to stress that Jews are only truly secure within their occupying entity.

This matter will certainly come up during the expected meeting between Trump and Netanyahu. Another significant agenda item will be the effort to convince Saudi Arabia to sign the Abraham Accords with the Zionist entity, a primary goal for Trump. Although economic agreements between governments are often signed without considering the sentiment of the Arab street, particularly in Morocco and Sudan, Trump frequently touts his skill in persuading Saudi Arabia to join and promote what he calls the “Abraham NATO.” However, today’s Saudi Arabia has evolved since signing its agreements with China and Iran. It is unlikely to embrace new regional conflicts for a temporary four-year administration. Instead, Saudi Arabia has significant demands, such as supporting a “two-state solution,” establishing a fully sovereign Palestinian state with self-defense capabilities, and allowing the construction of a nuclear reactor for peaceful purposes.

Meanwhile, the American stance on Iran remains unresolved, awaiting Tehran’s response to the recent “Israeli” strike. The U.S. has assured allies of its unwavering support for the Zionist entity. Yet, this backing, for now, remains limited to measures like intercepting Iranian missiles and drones, in collaboration with France and Britain. While some had hoped Washington would restrain Netanyahu from escalating tensions, American and Western powers cannot afford to cast doubt on “Israel’s” strength. This is particularly crucial among Abraham Accord partners, as their military collaboration hinges on confidence in “Israel’s” capabilities. The Gulf States, although they condemned the Zionist strikes on Iran and labeled them an infringement on Iranian sovereignty, remain under American military and economic influence, limiting the impact of their criticism.

The new administration will likely continue many of Trump’s policies, just as Biden’s administration adhered to Trump’s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan. The plan to begin withdrawing from Iraq next year will carry significant implications for America’s regional role. Whether the U.S. will abandon Bernard Lewis’ vision for a “New Middle East,” which includes establishing a Kurdish state on Iraqi and Syrian territory, remains uncertain. Such a move could provoke fierce conflict, with American and Zionist support for Kurdish forces clashing with opposition from neighboring states. There are also concerns that this could activate ISIS sleeper cells, which operate under American protection in areas like al-Baghouz in Hasakah and al-Tanf in Syria’s desert, near the Iraqi border.

It’s also important to remember America’s strategic focus on countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which extends from Central Asia through Iran and Syria to the port of Latakia. This project, known as the “Belt and Road,” is a critical component of the U.S.’s economic confrontation with China, Iran, and Russia. The ongoing conflict between the U.S. and Russia in Ukraine, fueled by Washington’s attempt to limit Russian military advancement since the 2014 Ukrainian coup, epitomizes this rivalry. But how does all of this connect to Lebanon and Palestine? The connection lies in the strategic alliances formed between Russia, China, Iran, and Syria, which directly affect U.S. plans in the region. America seeks to dismantle these alliances, promoting alternatives like the Indian and Dawood corridors.

The victories of resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine could mark another defeat for the “New Middle East” plan, which aims to use our regions to contain China’s growing influence. This divisive vision is not merely a modern endeavor tied to Trump. American plans to secure “Israel’s” territorial ambitions date back to President Harry Truman’s 1967 speech, in which he justified the displacement or elimination of Palestinians to safeguard Zionist security. These strategies date even further back to World War I, during President Woodrow Wilson’s era and his Zionist advisors criticized the Sykes-Picot Agreement .

American policy in the Middle East is deeply rooted in Zionist ambitions, predating figures like Kamala Harris or Donald Trump. This strategy has evolved since the late 19th century, converging with British and Zionist plans aimed at controlling global trade routes and ultimately culminating in the construction of the so-called Temple in Jerusalem. This represents the final stage of their vision, with the Trump era as just one part of it. However, a crucial counterforce persists in the enduring faith and resilience of the region’s people, Muslims, and Christians alike, whose resistance continues to shape realities on the ground in Gaza and South Lebanon.