Donald Trump’s stunning return to the White House, a political comeback amid multiple legal battles, has renewed attention on his ambitious campaign pledges. Notably, his commitment to “end wars,” particularly in the Gaza conflict and the wider Middle East, now faces scrutiny. Trump defied poll predictions, decisively beating Kamala Harris and securing a non-consecutive second term—a feat last achieved by Grover Cleveland in 1892. But as the election dust settles, analysts question whether his peace promises signal real intentions or are just politically expedient rhetoric.
During his victory speech, Trump declared, “I’m not going to start wars, I’m going to stop wars.” While these words resonate with his supporters, experts remain skeptical about their depth.
“It’s still too early to tell if Trump will actually pursue peace in the Middle East or if his words are mere political slogans,” notes Palestinian analyst Yousef Alhelou.
He warns that Trump might even exacerbate tensions, possibly backing Israel’s intensifying actions against Palestinians in Gaza. Many Palestinians, Alhelou adds, doubt Trump will pivot toward their interests, seeing his peace talk as a strategic campaign promise rather than a genuine commitment.
Palestinians have long felt U.S. leaders—whether Democrat or Republican—adhere to consistent pro-Israel policies. Alhelou voices this shared sentiment, acknowledging, “Maybe Trump will surprise us. But the track record doesn’t bode well for change.”
He said that Palestinians want the U.S. to pressure Israel toward compliance with international law and human rights standards.
Yet, Trump’s appeal did resonate with some Arab Americans, swaying states like Michigan with significant Arab-American populations. Many in this community, hopeful for a shift in Middle East policy, voted for Trump. In Michigan’s Dearborn, home to a large Arab-American community,
Trump addressed concerns about Gaza directly, stating, “It got to stop. We got to do something that is going to make everything run. What we want is peace.”
However, achieving a balanced approach could be complicated. Ecaterina Matoi, a scholar at the Middle East Political and Economic Institute, explains that Trump’s strong pro-Israel stance in his first term—including recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the Golan Heights as Israeli territory—may limit his flexibility.
Matoi also notes that Trump’s major financial backers include groups advocating a hardline pro-Israel stance, likely influencing his approach toward Iran and its allies.
The complexities deepen with Iran’s strengthening ties to Russia and China, particularly its BRICS alliance membership. Matoi points out, “This adds a layer of unpredictability to Trump’s Middle East policy.”
Despite these challenges, she expresses cautious hope: “Perhaps Trump will follow through on his promise to at least halt the wars and end the ongoing violence in Gaza.”
Analysts agree that Trump’s rhetoric has struck a chord with Americans critical of Biden’s approach.
Matoi argues that by promising to “stop wars,” including those in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump tapped into discontent over U.S. tax dollars funding foreign conflicts. “Biden’s administration largely ignored a segment of Americans who sympathize with Palestinians,” Matoi observes.
Sami al Arian, a Palestinian academic, highlights a related issue: many Americans felt disillusioned by the choices this election, with an estimated 25 million voters abstaining, unable to support either candidate. “That’s the real story of this election,” he states, underscoring a sentiment that could shape future political landscapes.
As Trump prepares to step back into the Oval Office, his next steps in the Middle East will be closely watched. Whether his peace promises signal a genuine pivot or remain aspirational campaign rhetoric will define both his legacy and America’s role in one of the world’s most volatile regions.
With Inputs From TRT
