It is difficult to view US President Donald Trump, who assumed office on 20 January, as a typical supporter of Israel. The US is making a clear departure from international legitimacy and the global consensus that the two-state solution represents a fair and comprehensive resolution to the Palestinian cause.
For the first time, the leader of a major world power is openly discussing the imposition of foreign control over territory that rightfully and historically belongs to another people. This represents a very dangerous precedent, not only because it comes from the US, but also because it may be used to justify similar actions elsewhere, allowing not only the US but also its rivals, such as China, to legitimise the annexation or control of foreign land.
For example, China’s potential use of US actions in Gaza, as referenced in Trump’s recent statements, could provide a rationale for the annexation of Taiwan, thus creating a state of global turmoil that runs counter to Trump’s own rhetoric on the need to end wars – a sentiment he voiced both upon his ascension to power and prior to it.
Furthermore, such statements embolden Zionist aspirations to revive the “Greater Israel” project, a core tenet of which involves the displacement of indigenous populations from their ancestral lands in preparation for Israeli territorial expansion. This may partly explain why Israel remains the only country in the United Nations without defined and recognised borders, as the ambition of a Greater Israel continues to haunt its visionaries.
Although these ambitions may presently manifest themselves only in rhetoric, Israel remains opportunistic, waiting for the right moment to take tangible steps towards realising this vision on the ground. Israeli control over parts of southern Syria and its refusal to withdraw from Southern Lebanon are perhaps early manifestations of this agenda.
The concept of Greater Israel, as envisioned by Zionist ideology, encompasses not just Palestine but also extends into Jordan, Lebanon, substantial portions of Syria, Iraq, northern Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
Tel Aviv, bolstered by US support, relies on the concept of economic borders that stretch far beyond Israel’s actual boundaries. The concept is deeply ingrained in Zionist thought, granting Israel the freedom to act with autonomy, exert control as it deems fit, and exploit any available resources. It is an ideology that is founded on a fundamental principle at the heart of Israeli existence: that every piece of land the children of Israel have occupied is, by right, Israeli land.
Zionist thought has established two core tenets related to this principle: the gathering of the Jewish diaspora and their return to the “Promised Land.” To address the demographic imbalance between Israel and its surrounding Arab neighbours, Jewish migration from all corners of the globe has been actively encouraged. Zionist organisations have coordinated global immigration campaigns, mobilised donations, and even bestowed a legal and legitimate character upon these efforts.
The gravity of this situation has been further compounded by Trump’s actions, and he signalled his support for this agenda long before his remarks on the displacement of the Palestinians from Gaza and the imposition of US control over the Strip. These statements, representing a form of imperialism long obsolete in international relations, were preceded by Trump’s comments, before even taking office, that Israel appeared “small” in comparison to its neighbours on the map. His first term also saw significant steps, such as moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and recognising Israeli sovereignty over the Occupied Golan Heights.
Upon assuming the presidency for the second time, Trump granted amnesties to extremist Israeli settlers in the West Bank, a move that exacerbated violence in the region, particularly in the West Bank, and culminated in the Israeli “Operation Iron Wall,” which began in the Jenin Refugee Camp and then spread to other camps in the Occupied Territories.
It is plausible to suppose that discussions between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during Netanyahu’s latest visit to Washington included plans to annex the West Bank or impose Israeli sovereignty over parts of it, particularly areas with illegal settlements, though such conversations were likely not publicly declared. This trajectory directly serves the objectives of the Greater Israel project, especially given the profound significance of the West Bank in the Jewish faith in stark contrast to the Gaza Strip.
Various assessments made before and after Trump’s ascension to power have largely centred on his identity as a businessman who prioritises deal-making over traditional diplomacy. If this characterisation holds true, what has exceeded expectations is the extent to which his decisions appear to be driven not merely by pragmatism but by a deeply ingrained ideological conviction.
It would not be an overstatement to describe him as a “doctrinal” figure whose actions are shaped by a religious ideology that immediately recalls the tenure of former US president George W Bush, who, under a similar ideological influence, launched a military campaign that culminated in the disastrous occupation of Iraq.
The prospect of imposing US control over Gaza, a scenario widely considered to be improbable both in theory and practice, would, if realised, likely mirror the failures of the US invasion of Iraq. This highlights the significance of the ideological framework guiding Trump’s actions, which most likely aligns with “Christian Zionism.”
This doctrine, deeply embedded in American society and institutions, advocates support for the establishment and expansion of a Jewish state in Palestine, viewing this as a historical and religious entitlement for the Jewish people. Furthermore, Christian Zionism considers the return of the Jews to the so-called “Promised Land” – Palestine – as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy, signalling the truth of the Torah, the nearing of the end times, and the eventual return of Christ.
This ideological current has exerted profound influence on US policymaking, shaping the stance of successive administrations, including the White House. Several American Presidents have openly identified with its principles, most notably Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Even Joe Biden explicitly declared himself a Christian Zionist on multiple occasions.
While Trump has not made a direct public statement to this effect, his policies align unmistakably with the tenets of this movement. His embrace of conservative values in Western society further reinforces this ideological alignment. The events of 11 September 2001 played a pivotal role in revitalising Christian Zionist sentiment in the US.
The consolidation of far-right dominance in the Israeli government, beginning with the Likud Party’s electoral victory in 1996 and with only brief interruptions since, has reinforced the alliance between Christian Zionism and the Israeli far-right, reaching such a degree that distinguishing between the extremism of Christian Zionist policies and those espoused by Israel’s far-right has become difficult.
If the Israeli Knesset has unanimously rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state, then Trump’s remarks about imposing American control over Gaza and displacing its population align with this position and serve its objectives.
The US must now recalculate the cost of this relationship between Christian Zionism and the Israeli far-right, not only in terms of its enormous advantages for Israel, but also in terms of the potential losses the US might incur as a result of the extremism inherent in these ties. Such losses could extend to Washington’s relations with its traditional allies in the region.
Meanwhile, the prevailing Arab consensus is a crucial opportunity that should be leveraged. Strengthening and institutionalising this consensus is imperative in order to mount an effective counterbalance to the Greater Israel project, aspects of which are becoming increasingly tangible and could materialise in the foreseeable future.
*The writer is a researcher at the Palestine-Israel Studies Department of the Egyptian Centre for Strategic Studies (ECSS).
* A version of this article appears in print in the 13 February, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: