As 2024 draws to an end, two events will mark its coda: the potential outbreak of a regional war in the Middle East, and the US general election. These two matters are far from disconnected.
Since the October 7th Hamas attacks on Israel, Joe Biden has armed Israel’s war in Gaza, with broad approval from Congress. It is because of America’s unwavering support that Benjamin Netanyahu has been able to continue the assault on Gaza, even in the face of an investigation by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) into “plausible” genocide. As a result, the US has become more isolated as it continues to defend its increasingly pariah-like ally. The vote by the UN General Assembly on September 18th which demanded Israel end “its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” within a year was passed with an overwhelming 124 votes in favour. 43 members abstained (including the UK), with the US and 13 others voting against.
Nonetheless, Israel will continue its jingoistic attacks in the Middle East; ironically, it suspects the UN of being anti-Israeli despite the fact a UN resolution created the Jewish state. The US will likewise continue yielding to Israel. But Biden’s influence has reached its nadir—not least because of the imminence of the US election, which will take place on November 5th. Given that Israel is dependent on the US, not least for its sway in international politics (it recently vetoed a Palestinian bid for full UN membership), the outcome of the election clearly has the capacity to shift the dynamics in the Middle East.
The two candidates offer differing visions of America’s role in foreign affairs. If Donald Trump moves into the White House, his foreign policy will likely be isolationist. That would be bad news for Ukraine—Volodymyr Zelenskyy recently described US missiles as essential to his plan to end the war with Russia. With proposals such as tariffs of up to 60% on Chinese imports, Trump’s policies would also serve to aggravate China. That could reinforce the emerging anti-Western alliance, spearheaded by Russia and China, which flexed its muscles at the recent UN vote by championing the Palestinian cause.
A second Trump term would certainly distance America from the international scene. What could that mean for the Middle East? For one, many countries—including Britain—have been hesitant to condemn Israel for fear of the subsequent fall out with the US. An America undermined by an erratic and radical president bent on isolating his country could signal that it is time to change tack. If more countries were to reprimand Israel, that would embolden not only the UN and the ICJ, but also those countries which see the Palestinian cause as representative of a wider struggle against Western imperialism.
If Kamala Harris becomes president, recent events have shown that she will most likely perpetuate her predecessor’s approach, continuing a policy of almost unqualified support for Israel, while maintaining the pretence of working towards a ceasefire. In reality, America arms and, to a lesser extent, funds Israel’s wars. It therefore has the leverage to stop its ally and bring about a lasting truce. A combination of history, ideology, and lobbying will ensure this will not happen, regardless of who wins the election.
Under Trump, however, the guise of reasonable diplomatic cooperation might just disappear. It seems unlikely that he would sustain with any vigour the spurious claim that America is working tirelessly to achieve a ceasefire. Since the Israel-Gaza war began, Trump has vowed on multiple occasions to cut off all aid to the Palestinians if he returns to power.
However, from his first term it is clear that Trump places notable emphasis on relations with Saudi Arabia—the kingdom owns around 17% of the world’s oil reserves. Mohammed Bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince, has recently refined his perspective on Israel: he will not recognise the Jewish state until a sovereign Palestinian state exists alongside it. That diminishes Trump’s achievement through the Abraham Accords and could bring his two primary interests in the region—ties with Israel and Saudi Arabia—into conflict with one another. This would leave him with two paths of action.
Given his friendship with the Israeli prime minister, Trump may give the Israelis carte blanche to continue as they see fit. But that could jeopardise hopes of a good deal with the Saudis; it might also inflame Israel’s tit-for-tat strikes with Iran, given the Republican nominee’s recent remarks supporting the targeting of Iranian nuclear facilities. A development of this kind would underline how unchecked the relationship between Israel and the US really is, thus vindicating the likes of Russia and China, who are keen to highlight Western double standards on international law. Such clarity would leave America alienated and build consensus within the UN around stronger action against Israel, such as sanctions, in order to bring it in line with international law.
Alternatively, Trump may give precedence to his relationship with Saudi Arabia and adopt a sterner stance with Israel. This could obstruct Netanhau’s increasingly discernable plans to keep his grip on power by perpetuating Israel’s wars, and instead bring about a ceasefire. This seems unlikely. Either way, a Republican victory on November 5th may inadvertently work against Netanyahu.
Harris, by contrast, is less likely to get cosy with the Saudis—she was outwardly critical of the regime after the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. Under her presidency, the Israelis would remain America’s only real ally in the Middle East. Combine this with the likelihood that Harris would continue Biden’s strategy—calling for a ceasefire while almost single-handedly supplying Israel’s war. That leaves a grim picture for anyone in Lebanon, Gaza, or the West Bank.
Could a Trump re-election really offer any good news for the Middle East? His comments since the Israel-Gaza war broke out have been equivocal, and it is hard to say with confidence what his policy would look like. But as the former president likes to point out, it is under Biden and the Democrats that the region has reached breaking point. Equally, from what can be assumed about her policies, a victory for Harris offers little hope for the victims of the region’s violence.
Sitting at a comfortable distance, it is easy to look at the US election and project our own politics; for many in Europe there is more to like about Harris and the Democrats. Yes, Trump’s return to the White House would be a disaster, both for America and the world. But for the Middle East, as always, it may not be so simple.