Central to this approach is the alignment with religious Zionism—a powerful current within Israeli politics that blends Jewish theology with nationalist expansionism.
Far from a tactical move, Trump’s embrace of this ideology reflects his worldview and key constituencies in his administration.
In his first term, Trump transformed US-Israel relations from a strategic alliance into an ideological partnership. Today, under his renewed presidency, that dynamic has intensified. Religious Zionism, often viewed within Israel as a radical movement, now enjoys open support from Washington. For Trump and many within his evangelical base, religious Zionism is not an extremist deviation but a theological imperative. This is evident in the type of staff and ambassadors he has been appointing.
Religious Zionism advocates for permanent Israeli control over all so-called “biblical lands” or the promised land, viewing territorial expansion not as a political issue but a religious duty. In Trump’s eyes, and those of his evangelical and Christian Zionist supporters, this movement represents a divine mission that aligns seamlessly with US policy under his leadership.
To remind the readers of Trump’s actions, in his first term, that underscore this alignment I list few; he: recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, Moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, Cut all US funding to UNRWA, closed the PLO mission in Washington, proposed the “Peace to Prosperity” plan without Palestinian consent, Supported the Abraham Accords while sidelining the Palestinian cause.
Now, in his second term, Trump has doubled down. Religious Zionist leaders in Israel have unprecedented access to American decision-makers. High-level US delegations openly visit contested areas in the West Bank. Washington’s diplomatic language now mirrors that of Israel’s religious-nationalist right, eroding any remaining pretence of neutrality.
US-Arab Relations Under Strain
This alignment comes at a geopolitical cost. While it deepens US-Israel ties, it places enormous pressure on the normalization framework established through the Abraham Accords and threatens the fragile architecture of US-Arab engagement.
Destabilizing the Abraham Accords
The Abraham Accords were negotiated under the logic of regional pragmatism: that Arab states could normalize relations with Israel in exchange for technological, economic, and security partnerships, while still preserving the Palestinian issue as a core concern. However, the growing influence of religious Zionist actors, now emboldened by Trump’s backing, undermines this balance.
Any move toward annexation, settlement expansion, or provocations at holy sites like Al-Aqsa risks unravelling the normalization deals. Countries like the UAE and Morocco face mounting public and political pressure to respond. The normalization narrative is increasingly viewed in the Arab world as morally bankrupt, particularly as Israeli policies grow more overtly exclusionary.
Marginalization of Palestinians
The Trump administration has systematically dismantled support mechanisms for the Palestinian people. By sidelining Palestinian leadership and aligning with factions that deny Palestinian statehood, the US has lost its credibility as a mediator. The effects are already visible: rising unrest in the West Bank, declining support for Palestinian leadership.
This dynamic also undermines US-backed stability in the region. Popular anger over perceived US-Israeli religious aggression threatens pro-Western regimes and fuels anti-American sentiment across Arab civil societies.
Tensions with Jordan and Egypt
Jordan and Egypt, the only Arab countries with longstanding (public) peace treaties with Israel, face mounting internal challenges. Jordan, in particular, is deeply alarmed by Israeli religious encroachment on Islamic sites in Jerusalem, which it administers through the Waqf. King Abdullah II has warned repeatedly against actions that violate the “status quo” in Jerusalem.
Egypt, while quieter, cannot afford a popular backlash that could destabilize its internal balance. Both countries are recalibrating their diplomatic posture, and further provocations could lead to open confrontations or suspensions of cooperation with both Israel and the US.
Global Repercussions
On the international stage, the US faces increasing criticism for embedding religious ideology into foreign policy. In the United Nations and other multilateral forums, most member states support a two-state solution and oppose unilateral actions. Under Trump’s leadership, Washington has become diplomatically isolated, often vetoing or ignoring resolutions that command global consensus.
Strategic rivals such as Russia and China are exploiting the void. Beijing, in particular, has increased its engagement with Arab states, offering economic partnerships without political interference. Moscow has also positioned itself as a defender of Palestinian rights, especially in forums where US credibility is compromised.
Even traditional allies in Europe are distancing themselves. The European Union remains committed to international law and human rights, both of which are perceived as eroded under Trump’s second presidency. The widening rift threatens transatlantic cooperation on Middle East policy.
Scenarios for the Near Future
If the Trump administration further empowers religious Zionist actors, we will witness the resumption of Annexation policies and spiking settlement activities.
While normalization technically holds, it becomes symbolic as Arab public opinion turns sharply hostile. Regional unrest grows, and US influence declines. One shouldn’t be deceived by the results or manifestations of the Trump visit to the three GCC countries.
We may see more provocations at a religious site, such as Al-Aqsa, which in turn may trigger rage in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and/or Gaza; regional protests may also escalate into broader uprisings. Arab states suspend or downgrade normalization. Such a situation may cause the U.S. to face widespread condemnation.
*The writer is Professor of International Humanitarian Law and former Regional Head of UNOCHA for MENA.
Short link: