Jafar Ghanadbashi – Middle East Affairs Expert
The U.S. has always acted as an indirect mediator in Palestinian negotiations. However, this time, few expected such talks to take place between the Americans and Hamas. Various scenarios have been proposed in this regard, the most significant of which is Donald Trump’s trip to the region. Before this trip, Trump took two unexpected actions: first, halting the war in Yemen, and second, negotiating with Hamas. Thus, the emerging scenario was that the U.S. president was creating favorable conditions for his regional visit to sign major economic deals with oil-rich countries along the southern Persian Gulf.

In Yemen, with Oman’s mediation, efforts were made to stop the fighting between the U.S. and Ansarullah in the Red Sea, and Qatar likely mediated in the case of Hamas. Then, talks emerged about Hamas releasing an American prisoner, which helped portray Trump to Arab nations as someone who engaged in dialogue with Hamas.

Supporters of this scenario believe that the news about Benjamin Netanyahu being unaware of the Hamas-U.S. negotiations and the agreement to release the American prisoner was fabricated to complete the narrative for public opinion. To some extent, these efforts succeeded, as Trump managed to show some distance from the Israeli regime’s criminal actions and a move toward Hamas. Subsequently, the American prisoner was freed, and dozens of food trucks were sent to besieged Gaza.

Thus, after these preparations, Trump was able to sign heavy trade deals and agreements in three Arab countries: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE., and Otherwise, since Trump is known as one of Netanyahu’s key supporters and his crimes in Palestine, domestic protests would likely have erupted during negotiations with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries.

Contrary to some claims, the Israeli regime was aware of Trump’s actions and permitted the entry of food trucks. It appears this scenario will be short-lived and likely expire after Trump’s trip ends. For instance, on Friday, we witnessed Israeli military attacks against Yemen, indicating that Washington will likely resume its previous policies afterward.

Meanwhile, Trump has shown many contradictions in his stance on Gaza—sometimes speaking about the complete displacement of Palestinians, other times about deploying U.S. forces there, and mostly supporting Netanyahu’s policies. These sharp shifts reflect his confusion in adopting a coherent policy. However, his dominant stance will likely align with his advisors and Congress, who strongly support the Israeli regime. Overall, it must be noted that the U.S.-Israel alliance is strategic, and these issues will not change U.S. policy toward the regime.

On the other hand, Arab countries also have their own considerations and interests. Over the past year and eight months since the Al-Aqsa Storm, Arab leaders have limited themselves to mild criticisms of the Israeli regime’s policies. At this stage, Arab leaders primarily sought to pave the way for Trump’s visit to secure long-term trade deals, and secondly, they wanted to showcase U.S. support against the Resistance Front. Given their ties with the U.S., they will unlikely change their stance on Hamas after this trip.

The main concern for the U.S., Arab leaders, and the Israeli regime is the widespread protests spreading across the Arab world. Historically, Arab countries have viewed regional security as achievable by weakening the Resistance Front, and they consistently take this into account when developing their policy. Thus, they are not keen on U.S. actions strengthening Hamas or Ansarullah.

However, due to Gaza’s dire conditions and the Israeli regime’s crimes, a movement against the regime has been formed in the UN Security Council and Europe, which may have an impact. Even the U.S., due to public pressure, might ask Israel to halt this situation. That is why these days, the Israeli regime is exerting all efforts to massacre Gazans and pressure them before any permanent ceasefire takes hold.