If the primary goal of the Trump administration is to quickly address issues in the Middle East and prevent further wars and instability, placing additional pressure on Arab countries might actually backfire.
While these regimes may not fear being overthrown through elections, they have unspoken concerns that are deeply rooted in their history and collective psyche. These fears arise from past experiences in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when tensions escalate beyond their limits. Resuming the war in Gaza, displacing Palestinian people, or annexing land in the West Bank could significantly destabilize these regimes and threaten their hold on power.
Throughout the Arab world, the Palestinian cause has been used to justify governmental failures and domestic repression, particularly while the conflict remains frozen. This narrative enables leaders to attribute their shortcomings to alleged “Zionist conspiracies.” Notably, brutal dictatorships, such as those led by Saddam Hussein and the Assad dynasty, have positioned themselves as the ultimate defenders of the Palestinian cause and as protectors of the Arab world against perceived Zionist expansionism. Consequently, maintaining a frozen conflict has become convenient for Arab leaders, serving as a foundation for their legitimacy and monopolization of power.
However, when the conflict intensifies, the dynamics shift, and it can lead to significant instability.
The Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel and the subsequent devastating war in Gaza created a tectonic shift in the region. The Palestinian cause has shifted from being a source of stability for Arab leadership to becoming a significant factor of destabilization. This change was further intensified by President Trump’s controversial calls for the permanent displacement of Palestinians. His statements not only undermined the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people but also inadvertently weakened the legitimacy of his regional allies.
Although these leaders are not democratically elected, public opinion plays a significant role in institutional stability, which in turn affects regime stability. Historical events have shown how the Palestinian issue has severely disrupted regional regimes, making these allies particularly cautious in their actions. They recognize that any further displacements or annexations could threaten their authority.
The devastation and loss of life in Gaza and Lebanon have profoundly affected the Arab population, evoking memories of the Nakba in 1948 when many were displaced. The massacres of Deir Yassin and Tantura then seem minor compared to the heavy toll from recent Israeli military actions. While Israelis view their strikes as necessary for deterrence against groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, this has intensified grievances in the Arab world.
The swift fall of Assad highlights the region’s instability. Ziad Daoud, a senior fellow at Harvard’s Middle East Initiative, warns that the ongoing conflict raises political risks: “The conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon are fueling anger in Arab streets. Taking a guide from history, the consequences of the 1948 war only became fully apparent four years later, when a military coup in Egypt cited the defeat in Palestine in the first paragraph of its first communique. The lesson — just because things appear quiet and stable today doesn’t mean there’s no combustible mix simmering.”
The first coup post-1948 occurred in Syria, but the major coup was in Egypt in 1952, led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, whose “Free Officers” blamed the monarchy and British influence for their defeat in Palestine. Nasser became a symbol of anti-colonialism and challenging Western influence. His ideas still resonate today, especially as anti-Western sentiment rises in the Arab world.
Another significant historical event that raises the threat level for Arab leaders is the assassination of Anwar Sadat. While Sadat is often hailed in the West as a courageous figure for pursuing peace, many in his own country viewed him as a leader who abandoned the Palestinian cause in order to isolate Egypt from the conflict through its peace agreement with Israel. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has already indicated that he does not want to face a similar fate if he moves forward with normalization with Israel without securing a state for the Palestinians.
Arab leaders understand that their influence over the Trump administration is limited, making it difficult to persuade him against his plans. However, Trump maintains a special relationship with bin Salman, which led him to select Saudi Arabia as the venue for his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, to initiate negotiations aimed at ending the war in Ukraine. Riyadh’s political capital should not solely focus on addressing the more distant conflict; instead, Saudi Arabia should leverage its unique ability to convene and launch a regional initiative that kickstarts the long-awaited process of reconciliation and integration.
The current circumstances surpass the potential of a limited normalization deal, presenting a larger opportunity. The successful rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran positions the kingdom as a credible broker for peace in the Middle East. Egypt and Jordan are integral pillars of this new regional pact that will extend to include Syria, Lebanon and the rest of the region’s countries. Together, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, with the support of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, can formulate a solid plan that facilitates the transition to Phase Two of the ceasefire and establishes a core regional strategy that ensures security, sovereignty, prosperity and dignity for all.
Donald Trump has expressed a strong desire for a comprehensive plan to achieve regional peace. He has built trust with the Israeli public, positioning himself uniquely to facilitate genuine peace in the region (provided he selects the right partners). Although Trump has stated that he will not impose his displacement plans on the Palestinians or the Arab countries, Arab leaders must still step up and commit to finding a path for reconstruction that will not be torn down in a few years by another war. Although it still requires further work, the Egyptian initiative announced at the Arab Summit can be viewed as a positive step in that direction. Resolving the Palestinian issue must be based on justice and sovereignty while also ensuring Israel’s security. This is best approached through a wider regional pact.
We are currently at a crossroads: we can either seize this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for peace or descend into chaos. Pursuing a regional pact aligns with the Trump administration’s strategic interests and could put the region on a path to prosperity. Additionally, it helps prevent instability that could lead to unpredictable consequences. Such upheaval could worsen the ongoing turmoil, pushing an already war-torn region further into chaos, which would have global repercussions that could jeopardize economic stability worldwide.
A key aspect of achieving this goal is maintaining the ceasefire in Gaza and rejecting any proposed plans for the annexation of the West Bank. The decisions made now will determine whether the region moves toward prosperity or chaos.
Shady ElGhazaly Harb is a visiting scholar at the Middle East Initiative at the Belfer Center and a research fellow at the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and a prominent activist of the Egyptian revolution and Arab Spring.