A Choose-Your-Own-Adventure Version of What Happens Next

Key Findings:

This Koplow Column explores the uncertainties surrounding what a second Trump presidency might mean for Israel and the Middle East. It outlines two plausible, contrasting scenarios and acknowledges that the eventual outcome may combine elements of both — or take an entirely different direction. Trump’s unique approach to governance, coupled with changed regional dynamics and evolving domestic priorities, adds complexity to predicting his policy trajectory.

Trump would return to office amid intensified regional instability, including active Israeli conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon and heightened tensions with Iran. This contrasts sharply with the relatively stable landscape during his first term’s culmination in the Abraham Accords.

Scenario 1: Deepening Israel’s Regional Integration and West Bank Presence

Trump’s administration could build on the Abraham Accords, aiming for further normalization agreements between Israel and Arab states, including Saudi Arabia. He might adopt a similar approach to bypassing Palestinian issues, as seen in the original accords, sidelining a two-state solution in favor of reinforcing Israel’s security and territorial claims.

Guided by figures like Mike Pompeo and David Friedman, Trump could endorse an expansion of Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank, including retroactively legalizing settlements and annexing strategic areas like the Jordan Valley. Sanctions related to settler violence might be lifted, signaling a U.S. green light for broader settlement activity.

Trump could reinstate maximum-pressure sanctions and support an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, taking a hardline stance on Tehran’s growing regional influence.

Scenario 1 would significantly deepen U.S.-Israel ties but likely exacerbate tensions with Palestinians and much of the international community, potentially inflaming regional instability.

Scenario 2: A Pragmatic Pivot Driven by New Realities

Trump’s rhetoric has recently emphasized domestic concerns and a desire for “peace and quiet” in the Middle East. This could manifest as pressure on Israel to quickly resolve its ongoing conflicts, including ending military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

Trump’s affinity for Gulf leaders may make him sensitive to their concerns about regional stability, particularly avoiding escalation with Iran and mitigating the fallout from Gaza’s destruction. Achieving Israeli-Saudi normalization would require Trump to push for concessions on the Palestinian issue, creating friction with Netanyahu’s coalition.

Trump could resurrect his 2020 Vision for Peace, framing it as a pathway to Saudi normalization and a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This would likely involve pressuring Israel to make symbolic or substantive concessions, such as curbing settlement expansion or improving Palestinian sovereignty.

Scenario 2 would seek to balance U.S. regional leadership with Trump’s preference for transactional diplomacy, though it could alienate parts of Netanyahu’s government and pro-settlement factions in Israel.

Factors Influencing Trump’s Second-Term Strategy

(1) Trump’s MAGA movement prioritizes focusing on U.S. issues over foreign entanglements, possibly limiting his willingness to escalate U.S. involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts; (2) The direction of policy could heavily depend on whether figures like Pompeo and Friedman dominate the administration’s Middle East strategy or are counterbalanced by voices advocating restraint; (3) The aftershocks of current Israeli conflicts, the rise of Iranian influence, and the increasing salience of Gulf state concerns about stability will shape Trump’s calculus.