Follow-up and observations by: Hamza Ali, Progress Center for Policies
Introduction:
Donald Trump’s imminent visit to the Gulf region has generated significant commentary in Western media, reflecting how far the President’s foreign policy has deviated from established U.S. diplomatic traditions.
From Washington to London, media outlets interpret this trip as symbolic of a broader strategic shift—one that de-emphasizes traditional alliances, elevates the Gulf states, and puts Israel’s preferences on the defensive.
In Detail:
Breaking with longstanding tradition by prioritizing the Gulf over neighboring allies, President Trump—according to media sources—is beginning his foreign travels in the Gulf, bypassing Canada, Mexico, and even Israel. This marks a symbolic rupture with longstanding diplomatic practices.
The Washington Post (May 11) noted that Trump’s choice of the region highlights his distinct approach to foreign policy, calling it “another sign of his intentions” to pivot away from traditional U.S. allies, who typically receive early visits from new American presidents.
The Times (UK) echoed this view on May 9, noting that since World War II, nearly every American leader has visited neighboring states first. The paper described Trump’s move as “deliberate,” part of “a much broader strategic reordering” that prioritizes Gulf economic influence over America’s traditional trade and security relationships.
The Gulf states are rising from regional players to powerful mediators. This shift in U.S. focus reflects the Gulf’s growing political and economic clout.
The Guardian (May 11) underscored this point, arguing that the Gulf now wields significant leverage over Washington. One analyst suggested Trump “may need them more than they need him.” The article described the region’s expanding influence as “an unavoidable reality of 21st-century geopolitical and economic life,” and proposed that Gulf leaders could use this leverage to shape Trump’s stance on Middle East peace—especially amid warnings of what one observer explicitly called an impending “second Nakba” for Palestinians.
Steven A. Cook, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, reinforced this theme in comments to The Washington Post (May 11), saying Trump’s visit represents a “real opportunity” to strengthen evolving and new regional dynamics.
Israel and Trump:
Signs of a rift in the relationship. In contrast to Trump’s distinctive alliance with the Gulf and the broader Middle East, his relationship with Israel—particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—is appearing increasingly strained.
On May 11, The New York Times reported that Trump rejected Netanyahu’s push for a joint U.S.-Israel military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. This marks a notable departure from their earlier relations. The paper quoted U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee, who told Israeli television that “The U.S. is not obligated to seek Israel’s permission.” The same article pointed out that Trump’s first presidential term included Israel in his inaugural overseas tour, whereas this time, he is skipping it entirely.
Similarly, NBC News (May 11) highlighted the widening gap between the two leaders. Quoting U.S. officials and Middle Eastern diplomats, the report said the Trump-Netanyahu relationship has reached a “crossroads” over how to handle the post-Hamas landscape and Iran’s weakened position. Frank Lowenstein, a former Obama administration envoy, told NBC that “the Israelis… thought Trump would give them a blank check,” but they now realize “Trump has his own agenda.”
Geopolitical Risks: Reordering Amid Regional Volatility:
Most of the commentary suggests a moment of deep reassessment. Trump’s approach seems rooted in a broader belief in disengaging from long-standing entanglements with Europe or from accommodating Israel’s security agenda in the Middle East.
The New York Times (May 11) noted that the key question now is how Trump and Netanyahu can reconcile their differences during “a time of major geopolitical shifts.” Analysts agree that the outcome could shape not only U.S. foreign policy but also the broader arc of political transformation in the Middle East.
Conclusion:
Trump’s visit to Gulf states signals more than just a diplomatic pivot; it underscores an imminent reordering of power and influence in the Middle East.
Western media analyses converge on a central point: the world is witnessing a formative moment in U.S. foreign policy and regional/global stability. Most significantly, this shift occurs as the Palestinian issue stands at a crossroads, with Israel facing mounting internal and external pressure.
As the U.S. abandons previously unquestioned alliance priorities, the political landscape opens up for new arrangements. This is not merely a shift in diplomatic protocol, but a strategic recalibration that could either cement new international and regional hierarchies—or offer a rare chance to reshape the region’s political future with Palestine’s cause moving toward the center.
