Trump’s Theatrics Of Peace And Machinery Of War – OpEd
The Middle East has once again become a zone of turmoil, and with Donald Trump’s return to the political arena, a chaotic and contradictory foreign policy has emerged. On one hand, he claims to be brokering a ceasefire in Gaza and is attempting to revive the Abraham Accords, aiming to bring Israel and Saudi Arabia closer. On the other hand, his threats of military action against Iran and intensified bombings in Yemen have pushed the region to the brink of war.
This contradictory approach is not only incoherent but resembles a sinking ship—one that is frightening even its allies, including Arab states and Israel. Is this policy merely a spectacle designed to gain global recognition or is it a sign of deeper strategic confusion?
Trump outwardly presents himself as working toward a Gaza ceasefire, but this move seems more like a bid for global attention than a genuine step toward peace. Simultaneously, he is pushing to revive the Abraham Accords, which were forged during his first term between Israel and several Arab countries like the UAE and Bahrain. His current goal is to bring Saudi Arabia into the fold, but the plan faces serious obstacles. As a key regional actor, Saudi Arabia is unlikely to sign on without guarantees of regional stability and progress on the Palestinian issue. Ongoing border tensions and long-standing distrust make these efforts precarious. The ceasefire in Gaza, while attractive in rhetoric, is undermined by Trump’s other aggressive moves, leaving it with minimal chance of success. Ignoring the Palestinian perspective and relying on political pressure only deepens the divide. Ultimately, these policies seem more like tools of political posturing than genuine paths to peace.
Trump’s aggressive stance toward Iran and Yemen paints a chaotic picture. By repeatedly threatening military action against Iran and continuing his “maximum pressure” strategy, he not only provokes Tehran but also unnerves his allies. The intensification of airstrikes on Houthi positions in Yemen, supposedly aimed at curbing Iranian influence, has left even supporters like Saudi Arabia and the UAE vulnerable to the consequences of regional instability.
Israel, too—fearing retaliation from Iran and its regional allies—watches with growing unease. This strategy, rooted in power projection rather than prudence, has brought with it waves of unrest and uncontrollable tension. Traditional U.S. allies in the region, such as Jordan and Egypt, find themselves bewildered, unsure how to balance loyalty to Washington with the protection of their national interests. Iran, in response, continues to expand its military capabilities, intensifying the cycle of confrontation. Meanwhile, in Yemen, the relentless targeting of civilians has dealt a severe blow to the moral credibility of this policy and has deepened the humanitarian crisis. Rather than showcasing strength, this aggressive foreign policy has bred fear and distrust, even among friends, and pushed the region closer to catastrophe.
This stark duality in Trump’s policy may stem from his deep-seated ambition for global prestige—perhaps even the hope that peacemaking theatrics and diplomatic performances could earn him the Nobel Peace Prize. On one hand, through initiatives like the Abraham Accords, he has tried to present himself as a peacemaker, highlighting the normalization of ties between Arab states and Israel as a historic breakthrough. On the other hand, he leans heavily on aggressive policies and displays of military might, aiming to project strength and send a clear message to rivals and potential adversaries. These two seemingly contradictory approaches—a theatrical display of peacemaking and a practical embrace of war—may appear to be part of a complex strategy. But in practice, this contradiction has proven fragile and unstable, producing results opposite to what was intended.
The idea of achieving peace through war is fundamentally flawed, as war rarely resolves the roots of conflict. Instead, it sows destruction, rage, and mistrust, laying the groundwork for new cycles of violence. Lasting peace demands diplomacy, inclusive dialogue, and structural justice, while war tends to eliminate those opportunities. Using force to impose peace inspires resistance and revenge among those defeated or harmed. America’s military interventions in the Middle East, and Trump’s renewed belligerence, have fueled extremism, worsened humanitarian crises, and squandered resources that could have been used for reconstruction and trust-building. This is a mistake Trump made during his first term—and now appears to be repeating with even greater urgency.
Trump’s new Middle East strategy, launched with claims of a Gaza ceasefire and a revival of the Abraham Accords, has in practice become a wreck. With threats against Iran and bombings in Yemen, he has alarmed even his allies. While he may seek a Nobel Peace Prize through diplomatic posturing, his warmongering approach mocks that very goal. The Arabs and Israelis who were expected to benefit from his policy now find themselves adrift in a worsening crisis he helped engineer. This contradiction not only undermines his credibility but has also pushed the region further into instability.
