How Trump Is Redefining U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East?
Ever since the Six-Day War in 1967, U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East has hinged on two key principles: security partnerships and unwavering support for Israel. From weapons deals to military bases, from covert operations to public endorsements, Washington’s footprint in the region has been overwhelmingly militarized and aligned with Israeli interests.
However, over the past week or so, the Trump administration has shown signs that the military-first approach may be falling out of favor. Instead, it appears to prefer economic partnerships, infrastructure development, and diplomatic flexibility—even if that means sidelining Israel’s interests. To understand this shift, it is essential to examine recent events in retrospect.
Trump’s recent visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) provided the clearest indication of this change. KSA pledged to invest $600 billion in economic partnerships with the U.S. across diverse sectors: artificial intelligence, energy infrastructure, aerospace, healthcare, and critical minerals. In addition, tech giants like Google and Oracle announced multiple joint ventures with Saudi Data Volt, while companies like Boeing secured multi-billion-dollar deals.
Crucially, this wasn’t just about defense, as it often had been. These were economic partnerships designed for long-term mutual benefit, shifting the U.S.–Saudi relationship from transactional arms sales to collaborative investment. In parallel, both countries signed agreements related to mining, energy transition, education, and even space exploration. It’s important to note that KSA still does not recognize Israel.
What surprised many was Trump’s decision to lift all sanctions on Syria. He stated, “I will be ordering the cessation of sanctions against Syria to give them a chance at greatness.” Syrian President Sharaa, a former Al-Qaeda operative who spent time in Iraq and once had a $10 million bounty on his head, is considered by Israel to lead a jihadist government. Meeting him on the sidelines after lifting sanctions—and offering to include Syria in the Abraham Accords—marks a significant shift in U.S. policy, which traditionally relied on military might rather than economic tools. Removing these sanctions, even partially, signals a pragmatic turn. The priority now appears to be less about punishment and more about reintegration and economic potential.
In recent times, Boeing has faced financial strain following multiple crashes and operational failures. Trump’s $96 billion deal with Qatar Airways has been seen as a lifeline for the company. More than a business transaction, it was a diplomatic signal that Qatar’s strategic value extends beyond hosting the U.S. Central Command.
Another notable shift is the U.S. stance on the Houthis. Whereas past administrations provided logistical and intelligence support to the Saudi-led campaign against the Houthis in Yemen, Trump has halted direct offensive operations. Reuters reported this week that alarms were triggered in Israeli cities—including Tel Aviv and Jerusalem—due to Houthi missile strikes. This reflects a broader U.S. move away from endless wars and toward economic and diplomatic leverage.
The U.S. has also reopened indirect communication channels with both Iran and Hamas. While comprehensive nuclear talks with Iran remain elusive, backchannel diplomacy continues, focusing on conflict de-escalation and regional stability. Even more telling was U.S. engagement with Hamas, previously considered off-limits. Negotiations to secure the release of American citizen Edan Alexander signaled a willingness to engage with non-state actors when U.S. citizens are involved. While the talks were narrowly focused, their very occurrence marks a significant departure from previous U.S. positions.
To top it all off, Reuters noted that Trump “bypassed” Israel, showing little regard for its concerns about Syria, Qatar, Iran, and the Houthis. Trump has made it clear that America’s primary interest in the Middle East is now economic engagement. To reassure Israel, he stated, “This is good for Israel, having a relationship like I have with these countries—Middle Eastern countries, essentially all of them.”
This transformation in U.S. policy is not without risk. Critics argue that reducing support for traditional allies like Israel could upset a delicate balance, while others fear that lifting sanctions or negotiating with groups like Hamas legitimizes repressive or violent actors.
If anything, it shows that the Middle East is no longer a battlefield for the U.S.—it has become a marketplace. By shifting from a posture of dominance to one of partnership—where trade, innovation, and infrastructure take center stage—America is adapting to a multipolar world in which influence is measured in capital, not just combat. This is a logical progression after more than two decades of war and destruction in the Middle East, especially as a rising China becomes an increasing concern for U.S. policymakers. Having more friends than foes is strategically sound. The U.S. may now see its best chance at relevance and leadership not in tanks and drones, but in trade deals and data centers. In this recalibration, the old rules—especially those that centered Israel in every move—may no longer apply.
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of The Spine Times.
Shamaim Ali
The author holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from the National Defence University, Islamabad, and has a keen interest in U.S. foreign policy and Lacan’s Theory of the Four Discourses.
