The politics of the Middle East changed dramatically this week, in response to international alarm over the plight of Palestinian civilians in Gaza – bringing a glimmer of hope that substantial quantities of food and other essential supplies might finally get through.
Yet major policy shifts by a quartet of key players – regional powers Israel and Saudi Arabia, as well as Security Council members France and Britain – also underscored the critical importance of another leader, whom all of them hope to sway to their cause.
America’s President Donald Trump.
Why We Wrote This
The international community has unified around the question of Palestinian statehood, diverging from the U.S. and Israel. But will it make a difference? Not since the mid-1950s under Dwight Eisenhower has a U.S. president held such sway over Israel.
Mr. Trump played a crucial part in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s sudden weekend announcement of pauses in military operations to facilitate aid deliveries.
And Mr. Trump now holds the key not only to whether the hunger and humanitarian crisis truly begins to ease.
He also commands unequaled influence over how and whether the nearly two-year war ends, and what comes next for Gaza, and Israel’s relations with the Palestinians.
Now, facing the choice of two very different options – short-term crisis management or full engagement in seeking a longer-term resolution – Mr. Trump is keenly aware of the daunting complexities involved.
On multiple occasions since the collapse of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire in the spring, he has voiced hope that a new truce was imminent, only to see deal after deal unravel.
Yet he also left no doubt this week that he recognizes his outsize ability to sway events.
Britain, France, and Saudi Arabia have been ramping up their efforts to get the president’s backing for a shared roadmap toward a political resolution.
The first step: large-scale humanitarian relief for the Gaza Strip and a lasting ceasefire, including the release of Israeli hostages held by the militant Hamas movement. Then, a postwar Gaza patrolled by regional peacekeepers and governed without Hamas, and an Israeli commitment to eventual negotiations on a “two-state” peace with the Palestinians.
All three countries are signaling a new urgency in pressing that case.
At a New York conference this week that included other major Arab and European states, the Saudis publicly committed themselves to a key Israel demand, saying Hamas must “end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons.”
The Europeans announced an equally dramatic shift. French President Emmanuel Macron was the first to declare he would use September’s U.N. General Assembly meeting to extend formal recognition to a Palestinian state. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer followed, saying the U.K. would do the same if certain conditions are not met. Canada then followed suit.
The immediate catalyst was the hunger crisis. The broader aim, Mr. Starmer emphasized, was to keep the prospect of a two-state peace from vanishing altogether.
Mr. Trump has responded by echoing Israel’s argument that such recognition would politically reward Hamas. It was Hamas that provoked the war, breaching the border on Oct. 7, 2023, and murdering, sexually abusing, and kidnapping hundreds of Israeli civilians.
But he also clearly understands the linchpin role he occupies, adding that the other Western countries’ recognition announcements wouldn’t really alter the situation.
What will matter – and what will signal whether he opts for crisis management over sustained involvement – is his interactions with Mr. Netanyahu.
All recent American presidents have had influence over Israel, if only because of Washington’s nearly $4 billion in annual military aid.
But the train of events since Oct. 7, and Mr. Netanyahu’s own difficult political position, have given Mr. Trump more sway than any president since the 1950s.
Then, Dwight Eisenhower was at the helm of a burgeoning superpower. Israel was less than a decade old. Britain and France, fading former imperial powers, joined with Israel in a plan to seize back the nationalized Suez Canal from Egypt – only for the U.S. president in effect to order them back home.
Mr. Trump’s leverage has been strengthened by billions of dollars in additional military support since Oct. 7, and especially by his decision to green-light and then actively support Israel’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
There’s a further political reason for his influence.
Mr. Netanyahu remains widely unpopular at home. There have been signs the military is starting to question the logic of continuing the war – despite pressure from far-right members of his coalition to expand it.
And, this week, the worsening conditions for Gaza’s civilians brought home Israel’s international isolation.
Mr. Netanyahu can shrug off much of the criticism – from the United Nations, aid groups, even longtime allies like Britain and France – without concern of significant popular pushback.
But especially with political pressures at home, he can’t afford to alienate his one irreplaceable supporter: the United States.
Israeli reports suggested that trying to avoid such a breach was why Mr. Netanyahu changed tack on aid access – a concern that will have deepened when, shortly afterward, Mr. Trump contradicted Israel’s insistence that the civilian crisis was being overblown.
Speaking to reporters, the president said there was “real starvation” there.
Will he take a similarly blunt line on the need for an early ceasefire – if, that is, Arab mediators can finally bring Hamas on board?
Mr. Netanyahu will hope the answer is no, and that, as the president said after the latest deal collapsed, he’ll favor letting Israel “finish the job.” Britain, France, and Saudi Arabia will be hoping the answer is yes.
But they all know that in the tug-of-war over Gaza, this “Trump card” matters most.
