With his re-election as US president, Donald Trump has achieved an unexpected political comeback against all odds. But what does his election victory mean for Israel and the Middle East? An analysis.
By Josias Terschüren
Never before has a presidential candidate had to overcome so many other obstacles besides the political battle to reach the White House: two impeachment proceedings, several court cases, and two assassination attempts are among his record. He survived and overcame them all. Moreover, buoyed by the support of the disenfranchised working and middle classes, he was elected the 47th President of the United States by precisely those voters who were considered to be firmly in the Democratic camp: Latinos, Black voters, and Jewish voters.
The election victory of the often vulgar and tough, much-maligned billionaire, who simultaneously attracts masses at his rallies and is a very effective communicator as a social-media-savvy entertainer, was unexpectedly clear: Trump surpassed Kamala Harris by more than five million votes cast in the "popular vote", won 312 electoral votes (270 are needed for the presidency), secured the Senate with a stable Republican majority, and since mid-November also had the House of Representatives on his side.
Furthermore, the US Supreme Court currently has a stable conservative majority, and the Republican Party is very united internally. It also gained significant support and broader appeal during the election campaign. As an added bonus, unlike the Democrats, the generational shift has already taken place in key positions within the Republican Party.
Trump, in his final term, is thus endowed with an incredible concentration of power, coupled with a clear mandate from voters to tackle the country's problems forcefully and radically change the status quo. At the top of his priority list is revitalizing the economy, closely followed by domestic security. This suffered greatly under Biden, and so open borders, the high number of illegal immigrants and the resulting secondary problems such as increased crime, homelessness, human trafficking, drug smuggling and use, as well as the threat to social cohesion, became a decisive issue in this election.
Peace through strength
However, a clear shift in American foreign policy is also becoming apparent. It is expected that Trump, who declared during his election campaign that he wanted to be a peace president in his second term, will adhere to his "peace through strength" approach. This approach leverages the strategic advantages of the US to enforce foreign policy objectives with a strong hand: control over the dollar as the international reserve currency, the power of the US military, the strength of the US market as a means of sanction—by using the threat of restrictions or bans on operating in the US market as an economic weapon—the US veto power in the UN Security Council, US control of NATO, and its status as a protecting power of Western democracies.
Combined with Trump's dealmaker mindset, this approach, defying conventional wisdom, yielded astonishing results during his first term: His overt pro-Israel steps—recognizing the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel, moving the US embassy there, and replacing the US doctrine of the Hansell Memorandum with the Pompeo Doctrine—ultimately led to the breakthrough of the Abraham Accords. For the first time, the peace formula was no longer "land for peace," but "peace for peace.".
Herbert Hansell was legal advisor to the US State Department under President Carter. In his 1978 memorandum, which has since become doctrine, he argued that Israeli settlements should be considered illegal under international law per se. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reverted to Reagan-era US policy by rescinding the Hansell memorandum and declaring that "Israeli settlements should no longer be considered illegal under international law per se." Trump is likely to build on this interim decision in his second term; more on that later.
Personnel is politics
Just one week after his election victory, Trump began announcing nominations for cabinet posts and key positions within his team. Some nominations still require congressional confirmation, which, given the current balance of power, is a mere formality in most cases. A crucial lesson from Trump's turbulent first term in this regard was the importance of meticulous attention to personnel selection, because "people are policy.".
What would have been a bad omen for Israel with the candidates of the Harris campaign is the opposite with Trump. Trump's nominations for key foreign policy positions all speak a clear language: US foreign policy under Trump will become much more pro-Israel. This ranges from the designated Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, to National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and UN Ambassador Elise Stefanik, to the new US Ambassador to Israel, the evangelical Baptist preacher and former Governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee.
Trump's starting lineup suggests a clear and strong stance against Iran and its pernicious influence in the region and beyond. The effusive reaction from Jerusalem speaks volumes. The war-torn and peace-seeking Middle East could certainly use new approaches and a breath of fresh air. Unlike the previous administration, the Trump team stands for the view that the root of the problem in the Middle East today is not the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but rather the malicious behavior and actions of the Iranian regime. We can expect a continuation of the maximum pressure strategy against Iran from Trump's first term. This means tough sanctions and an expansion of the Abraham Accords.
With Mike Huckabee, a non-Jewish US ambassador is being sent to Israel for the first time, an honor and recognition of the important role that Christian Zionists play in relations with Israel. Elise Stefanik, who made a name for herself with her relentless and pointed questioning in the hearings of university presidents before the US Congress regarding the antisemitic scandals on their campuses, will grill the United Nations for its hypocrisy, its antisemitism, and its obsessive focus on Israel.
Failed UN institutions that in the past acted as fronts and support organizations for terrorists from Hamas, Hezbollah & Co., such as UNRWA, UNIFIL, and the International Court of Justice, must expect severe consequences. Supply shortages, delays, and restrictions on the military resources provided to Israel are also likely to be a thing of the past under the new administration.
Dangerous “lame duck”
Until Trump takes office, the current US administration under Biden will do everything in its power to prevent the implementation of Trump's doctrine and policies and to leave him with as many obstacles as possible. Just as Barack Obama once did during his "lame duck session"—that is, the part of his term remaining after the election when his defeat was already a foregone conclusion—Biden could still inflict serious damage on Israel.
Obama had, behind the scenes, drafted UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which branded Israeli settlements as "illegal under international law," and then had other nations introduce it, allowing it to pass with a US abstention, bypassing its own veto. A second planned resolution, with a concrete deadline for the establishment of a Palestinian state and penalties for Israel in case of non-compliance, was blocked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump. They had even managed to provoke Russian President Vladimir Putin into threatening a veto. Obama's rather undemocratic political genius lay in imposing such measures, for which he would not have had a majority in the US Congress, on America via the UN Security Council, thus circumventing the US Congress.
Leading experts fear that Biden could now follow this example. Possible goals could include the recognition of Palestine as a state or sanctions against Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Both steps would significantly shift the status quo to Israel's disadvantage. Preventing this was likely one of the reasons for Israeli President Isaac Herzog's visit to Biden in mid-November.
Israel's right to win the war on terror
During his election campaign, Trump outlined his approach to the existential conflicts and wars into which Israel has been embroiled since October 7, 2023, with a single sentence: "I will support Israel's right to win the war on terror." The Biden administration has thus far never allowed this, but has consistently insisted that Israel restrain its overwhelming power in order to preserve the possibility of a two-state solution. In biblical terms, Israel was a warrior bound by its brothers, like Samson of old.
While under Biden Israel had to unilaterally cross his red lines regarding the invasion of Rafah, the elimination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, and enforce these actions under intense political pressure against Washington's wishes, the remaining restrictions are likely to be lifted now, provided they accelerate the end of the war. It is improbable that Netanyahu, in his "lame duck" session, will grant Biden the honor of having secured peace in the Middle East at the last minute. That laurel wreath will likely be bestowed upon the newly inaugurated Trump by the strategic fox Netanyahu. Before that, however, he must achieve Israel's war aims: the release of the hostages, the containment and dismantling of Hamas and Hezbollah, peace in the north and south of the country, and the decimation of the Houthis in Yemen.
The pressure on Hamas and Hezbollah, or what remains of them, and their backers in Qatar, Turkey, and Iran is likely to increase. And at the top of Israel's priority list is the elimination of the Iranian nuclear program. The new Israeli Defense Minister, Israel Katz, has already stated openly that the moment has never been more opportune. The Israeli government and opposition agree that the nuclear program must be shut down, and such cross-party consensus on political issues in contemporary Israel is as rare as an albino in the wild.
Trump's Middle East policy has always been about treating his allies as sovereign states, not vassals, and empowering them to resolve regional conflicts in their own common interest. There is no closer, more powerful, or better-suited partner for this strategy than Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu. Ironically, Netanyahu, whom Europeans consider a red flag, is key for Trump to unlock the new Middle East. He already played this role in initiating the Abraham Accords, and he will continue to do so in the coming years. He was therefore the second world leader to congratulate Trump on his re-election.
Perhaps a CDU-led federal government will be able to assess and seize the potential for foreign, economic, and energy policy that is just waiting to be exploited in the Middle East. To achieve this, German Middle East policy would have to abandon its sanctimonious displays of virtue, as well as its clinging to outdated dogmas of cherished peace approaches. Today's Middle East must be approached on equal terms and, above all, pragmatically. Anyone who sees Israel as part of the problem rather than the solution has not yet understood the situation.
Especially after Israel's military successes in its defensive wars, the reorganization of the region and the emergence of genuine peace and security are possible and within reach. Having eliminated the world's biggest terrorist strongholds in its vicinity, Israel is now poised to discover and realize a new Middle East and a substantial peace dividend.
That new approaches and new paths must be found is becoming increasingly clear to observers of the region. The "sacred cow" of the two-state solution could end up on the scrap heap. With Huckabee and David Friedman, the former US ambassador under Trump, who has just published an insightful book on the subject entitled "One Jewish State," there are strong voices in the new US administration advocating for the recognition of Judea and Samaria as Israeli territory.
Are Palestinians the new Puerto Ricans?
In his book, Friedman argues that Israel is part of the solution, not the problem, and that the annexation of Judea and Samaria is precisely the step that would ultimately bring about genuine peace. He states that Palestinians would be better off nowhere in the region than as a minority within a Jewish state. He therefore proposes the annexation of Judea and Samaria and the granting of special civil status to all Palestinians, with limited obligations (exemption from military service and tax breaks), full autonomy in regional self-government, and limited rights (no right to vote in national elections).
This would allow Israel to remain a Jewish and democratic state, resolving the dilemma of a one-state solution, which undermines Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state through demographic means. In Friedman's words, "Israel is the only nation capable of bringing the Palestinians into the 21st century." As a historical example of a similar solution, he cites Puerto Rico, which was annexed by the United States in 1917 and has been part of the US territory ever since. Puerto Ricans are US citizens, pay lower taxes, and do not have the right to vote in US elections. However, in the event of natural disasters, they enjoy, for example, the full support of the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Such a step would mean a complete departure from the two-state solution as the prevailing formula for resolving the conflict. Even if such a step were contrary to generally accepted wisdom, it would be consistent with Trump's previous Middle East policy. His first term was a plowing and sowing of the firstfruits of the Abraham Accords. Will we now see the harvest?
This article first appeared in our newspaper "Israelaktuell," issue 139. You can order the newspaper here . We would also be happy to send you several copies for distribution.
