US President Donald Trump has called on countries across the region to join the normalisation agreements with Israel, extending his appeal even to states that already maintain diplomatic ties and agreements with the occupation state, including Egypt, Turkey, and Jordan.
In a statement published days ago on his Truth Social platform, Trump linked ongoing negotiations with Iran to the expansion of the Abraham Accords. He specifically mentioned Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan, alongside the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, which signed the agreements in 2020.
Trump’s remarks cannot be separated from his long standing doctrine of imposing “peace” through strength. However, military force alone has failed to deliver his vision for the region. He has neither secured a military victory over Iran nor succeeded in forcing Tehran into submission through threats of overwhelming destruction. At the same time, diplomatic negotiations have yet to achieve his desired outcomes.
As a result, Trump appears to have turned to political pressure and leverage. Yet rather than targeting Iran, which has shown little willingness to yield under pressure, his approach seems directed towards regional actors seeking an end to ongoing conflicts due to concerns over their own political and economic interests.
A Vision Shared by Trump and Netanyahu
Trump’s objectives closely align with those of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who continues to pursue a broader project of reshaping the Middle East.
Just as Trump failed to achieve his goals through military pressure, Netanyahu has also failed to secure decisive victories in Gaza, Lebanon, or against Iran. None of these fronts have been conclusively resolved, and the much promoted goal of absolute victory remains unrealised.
Both leaders increasingly appear to be searching for a political exit that can be presented as a strategic success to their respective domestic audiences ahead of upcoming electoral challenges later this year.
This narrative centres on portraying the region as moving towards a comprehensive regional deal with Israel at its core. The proposed framework envisions a regional bloc comprising Gulf states, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, and Pakistan, aimed at isolating Iran and its allies.
What Trump and Netanyahu seek is not merely political rapprochement. Their broader objective is the construction of a new regional order that would reshape the Middle East in accordance with Israeli interests and reinforce alignment with American policy priorities.
Beyond Formal Peace Agreements
Under this vision, countries such as Egypt would be expected to move beyond what has often been described as a “cold peace” with Israel.
The goal would be the establishment of normal relations across all sectors, including public, cultural, media, economic, political, and security spheres. This would involve deeper coordination on major regional issues such as Gaza, the Red Sea, and Iran.
Turkey occupies a similarly important position in Trump’s regional calculations.
The US president appears interested in easing tensions between Ankara and Israel that emerged during Israel’s genocide campaign in Gaza, while encouraging renewed cooperation on issues including Syria, Iran, energy, and trade.
Saudi Arabia Remains the Key
Trump views Saudi Arabia as the gateway to any broader regional transformation.
However, Riyadh continues to link normalisation with Israel to the launch of a genuine political process addressing the Palestinian cause, a position that Netanyahu and his far right government have consistently rejected.
The responses from key states mentioned by Trump that do not maintain official relations with Israel, namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Pakistan, have all tied the issue of normalisation to developments concerning Palestine rather than Iran.
This distinction places Trump’s appeal within the framework of political pressure, allowing responsibility to be shifted onto regional actors if they reject his proposal and he later chooses to resume confrontation with Iran.
Domestic Pressures Inside the Republican Party
Trump’s call also comes amid growing criticism within the Republican Party regarding any potential settlement with Iran.
For Trump, promoting the expansion of normalisation agreements offers an opportunity to create a new success story capable of dominating domestic political discussions and diverting attention from the failure to compel Iran through negotiations after failing to defeat it through military means.
Hardline figures within the Republican Party have warned of political consequences for both Trump and the party should any agreement with Iran be perceived as falling short of Iranian defeat.
Against this backdrop, the push for expanded normalisation serves not only as a regional strategy but also as a domestic political tool.
A Strategic Crisis for Washington
Trump’s call to expand the Abraham Accords reflects a deeper strategic challenge facing his administration.
At its core is the inability to defeat or subordinate Iran through either military or diplomatic means. This reality carries potentially significant consequences for American influence and credibility as a global power.
It also presents immediate political risks for Trump and the Republican Party ahead of the US midterm elections.
Whether Trump ultimately resumes military confrontation with Iran or reaches an agreement that falls short of his expectations, the political costs appear increasingly unavoidable. This has led him to advance what critics view as an ambiguous political concept rather than a detailed initiative or concrete plan.
Instead, it remains another broad proposal added to a long record of statements that often contain conflicting positions.
Can an Iran Deal Lead to Wider Normalisation?
If Trump is betting on transforming an agreement with Iran into a gateway for broader normalisation across the region, the success of that strategy will depend largely on the outcome of both negotiations and confrontation with Tehran.
The future political landscape of the Middle East will be shaped by developments on that front.
Should the United States fail to force Iranian concessions, some observers argue that regional engagement may increasingly expand towards Iran itself rather than towards Israel.
Israel’s Post War Vision
From the Israeli perspective, one of the central objectives after the war is the expansion of normalisation with Arab states and the broader restructuring of the Middle East.
Israeli policymakers view this process as an opportunity to deepen political ties while building new economic and security networks that strengthen Israel’s regional position.
For Israel, the Abraham Accords were never viewed as a completed project following their signing in 2020. Rather, they are regarded as a process that requires expansion and further development after the war.
This perspective helps explain why Trump’s proposal appears closely coordinated with Netanyahu’s government. It was further reinforced by statements from US Senator Lindsey Graham, whose comments towards states rejecting normalisation carried clear elements of pressure and warning.
Replacing Palestine with Iran
Although Israel believes that existing normalisation agreements have largely survived the war at the official and security levels, and that current partners have not withdrawn from their relationships despite the genocide in Gaza, it also recognises several challenges.
The war has weakened prospects for broader civilian normalisation, increased the political cost of expanding ties with new states, and returned the Palestinian issue to the centre of regional calculations.
Israel’s strategic objective is to replace Palestine as the dominant regional issue with Iran. Through political bargaining and sustained pressure, often with the support of its closest ally in Washington, it seeks to redirect regional priorities away from Palestinian rights and towards confrontation with Tehran.
