Trump needs to stop getting involved in Middle East drama

The Hill

4 days ago

President Trump recently visited a number of Persian Gulf countries, amid intense speculation about his administration's policy toward the Middle East.
If only his policy were to disengage from the region altogether.
Earlier this month, Trump announced that the U.S. had made a deal to halt strikes on the Houthis in Yemen. Middle East special envoy Steve Witkoff has continued to engage in talks with Iran toward a nuclear deal, while disagreements over the issue have roiled Trump's Cabinet and the Pentagon. The president also announced that he would lift sanctions on Syria and met with its new de facto leader Ahmed al-Shara, a former al-Qaeda militant.
Meanwhile, Israel's security cabinet has approved a plan to raze and occupy Gaza, permanently displacing its 2 million Palestinian inhabitants. Trump has previously suggested that the U.S. will 'take over Gaza' and has suggested that its Palestinian residents be 'cleaned out.'
Trump's eagerness to end hostilities with the Houthis, cut a deal with Iran, and lift sanctions on Syria are all encouraging. But his willingness to greenlight Israel's ethnic cleansing of Gaza and his seeming desire to forge even closer ties to the Gulf states preserves and expands the worst aspects of longstanding U.S. policy toward the region.
For decades now, our country has devoted far too much attention to the Middle East, basing policy on preferential treatment of Israel and Saudi Arabia and hostility toward Iran. This vastly overstates the importance of the Gulf region for U.S. security and global affairs, while unnecessarily drawing the United States into troublesome entanglements in the region.
U.S. policy toward the Gulf during the Cold War was premised on that region's central role in the world energy market — and therefore the supply of oil to U.S. allies in Western Europe and East Asia. Washington made it a priority to prevent the Soviet Union or a hostile local power from dominating the region and disrupting the flow of affordable energy to its allies, which were still reindustrializing and remained militarily underdeveloped.
Today, the United States need not protect energy supplies from the Gulf on behalf of its allies, nor does it face the threat of a single power dominating the region. In view of its own increasing resource constraints and the challenge posed by China, Washington should deprioritize the Middle East and have normal businesslike relations with all the powers in the region, rather than special relationships with some and adversarial relations with others.
Old habits die hard, however.
Trump and his predecessor Joe Biden both doubled down on their commitment to Israel and Saudi Arabia while seeking to isolate Iran. After Trump in his first term torched the Iran nuclear deal, the single diplomatic achievement of the Obama administration, Biden refused to ink a new deal with Tehran, continuing on the collision course set by Trump's 'maximum pressure' policy. Now, ironically, Trump seems ready to make a new deal very much along the lines of the old deal in order to avoid a war with Iran.
The Trump administration may make the mistake of thinking that an agreement with Iran requires concomitant concessions to the Israelis and Saudis. Trump has long sought to achieve Saudi-Israeli normalization in exchange for a U.S. security pact with Riyadh, the meat of the so-called 'Abraham Accords.' Israel's brazen rampage in Gaza has ruled out normalization and thus has so far been an obstacle to a U.S.-Saudi security deal.
Some have noted that Trump's ties to Israel seem under strain. Trump did not consult with the Israelis before making a deal with the Houthis and has sidelined its concerns regarding a nuclear deal with Iran. Furthermore, he did not visit Israel during his trip to the region.
However, Trump's continuing endorsement of — and possible participation in — Israel's reoccupation of Gaza, or his offer of U.S. security guarantees to Saudi Arabia, would be the worst possible recommitments to partnerships that have long been both strategically and morally unsound.
Moreover, while the U.S. has participated for too long in the wrecking of Syria, there is no need to lend legitimacy to the new government, whose trustworthiness is highly suspect — particularly in the wake of the massacre of Alawite minorities in recent months.
Trump has been willing to make some radical breaks with prior U.S. policy, putting European allies on notice, seeking an end to the Ukraine war, and being willing to cut deals with adversaries in the Gulf. But the best change would be to stop making concessions to Israel and Saudi Arabia, stop being drawn into their local rivalries, normalize relations with Iran, and largely forget about the region's security affairs altogether.
Christopher McCallion is a fellow at Defense Priorities.