By Alon Ben-Meir
Hamas’ horrific October 7 attack and Israel’s massive retaliatory war have fundamentally changed the dynamic of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. New political, psychological, and factual regional conditions have been created since October 7 that cannot be ignored, as they directly impacted not only Israeli-Palestinian relations for a generation but also regional stability.
Donald Trump will have to choose between paving the way toward the establishment of a Palestinian state or setting the stage for the next catastrophic conflagration that will dwarf the current war.
Trump should carefully consider the following five crucial changes in regional dynamics if he wants to revive “the deal of the century,” however remote it may seem at this particular juncture.
Hamas’ Massacre and its Psychological Implications
It is hard to overestimate the psychological ramifications of Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israelis as it brought to life images from the Holocaust. In many ways, it reaffirmed Netanyahu’s tragically misleading two-decades-long public narrative and reinforced the pervasive public mindset that the Palestinians posed a perpetual existential threat to Israel. Thus, any effort that could lead to a two-state solution will face vehement Israeli resistance, which can be mitigated once Israelis come to terms with the fact that their ultimate national security rests on the establishment of a Palestinian state. This must be firmly tied to comprehensive security arrangements to allay the Israelis’ psychologically ingrained national security concerns.
After 14 months of brutal war, both sides have failed to achieve their stated objective. Even if Israel captures or kills every Hamas combatant, it cannot liquidate it as a national movement and as an idea. Hamas will survive any losses and terrorize Israel for as long as it takes, albeit knowing that Israel is a formidable military power, far beyond their capacity to destroy. This mutual realization has changed the dynamic. Though nearly decimated, Hamas largely achieved its goal. It has fundamentally shaken the status quo, making it unequivocally clear that the Palestinian cause will no longer be ignored.
Saudi Arabia’s role
Before October 7, the US had been negotiating Israeli-Saudi normalization. At the time, the Saudis were willing to settle for a vague commitment by Israel ‘to make major progress toward a solution to the Palestinian conflict.’ But as the horror of the war in Gaza unfolded, the Saudis changed their position, mainly due to the public’s outcry about what the Palestinians have tragically endured.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) publicly stated, “The Kingdom will not cease its tireless efforts to establish an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and we affirm that the kingdom will not establish diplomatic relations with Israel without one” [emphasis added]. It should be noted that this statement is not political posturing. Saudi Arabia will no longer settle for a vague reference to the Palestinians’ right to statehood, but MBS can pressure the Palestinians to moderate their position.
Jordan’s Growing Trepidation
Jordan faces significant challenges in maintaining internal stability amid rising public anger towards Israel. It must balance its historical commitments to the Palestinian cause and its peace treaty with Israel, while managing complex regional dynamics. There are also fears of a spillover of Palestinian refugees into Jordan, which can destabilize Jordan, especially if Israel annexes further Palestinian territories in the West Bank. Recently, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that “2025 is the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria,” which terrifies the Kingdom.
The ongoing conflicts could also increase militant activity and exacerbate existing vulnerabilities, particularly among Jordanian youth. Moreover, other regional dynamics further complicate Jordan’s position, compelling it to navigate threats from Iranian proxies while managing its relationships with Israel, Western allies, and neighboring Arab states. The creation of a Palestinian state will prevent instability in Jordan, which is critical to Israel’s national security.
International Recognition of a Palestinian State
One hundred forty-six countries have recognized the Palestinian state, which is a significant step because it legitimizes the Palestinians’ right to statehood and places Palestine on equal footing with other states. Three Western European countries, Ireland, Norway, and Spain, have recognized Palestine this year, which may encourage others to follow suit. Unquestionably, the Palestinians have made significant international inroads in support of a Palestinian state.
Trump may well be in the best position to start a genuine peace process that will eventually lead to Palestinian statehood. Given his commitment to Israel’s security, he must not allow Israel to annex any more territory in the West Bank or resettle in Gaza, as this will only set the stage for the next horrific conflagration and throw the entire region into unprecedented turmoil. Due to the affinity that most Israelis hold towards Trump, he is in a much stronger position than many of his predecessors, not only to call for a two-state solution but act on it.
Working toward Palestinian statehood would dramatically allay Jordan’s deep anxiety about the country’s stability, meet the Saudis’ demand to establish a Palestinian state as a prerequisite to normalizing relations with Israel, give hope to the Palestinians that the day of their salvation is near, and temper extremism and anti-Israeli sentiments. The collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and the dramatic weakening of Iran and Hezbollah will deprive them of exploiting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to advance their regional agendas.
The biggest obstacle Trump will face is the current Israeli government, which has sworn to block the creation of a Palestinian state. This government has learned nothing from decades of occupation. It wants now to annex much of the West Bank, resettle Gaza, and plunge Israel into interminable violence and destruction. There is nothing more ominous for Israel if, indeed, the government implements such a plan. It will shatter the Palestinians’ final glimmer of hope as it will lead to horrific consequences unless Trump prevents it from happening.
For Trump to revive the “deal of the century,” he will have to go over Netanyahu’s head and address the Israeli public directly, pointing out the stark reality that the Israelis continue to be oblivious to. He should emphasize that:
After 57 years of occupation, it has become abundantly clear: the occupation is not sustainable, evidenced by the fact that Israeli-Palestinian relations are worse today than ever before. The situation is bound to explode time and again with ever-increasing death and destruction.
Nearly seven million Palestinians are living in the West Bank, Gaza, and Israel proper, equal to the number of Jews living in the same area. By what means and for how much longer, he must ask, can Israel oppress the Palestinians of an equivalent population with no endgame in sight?
Ninety percent of all Palestinians were born under occupation; they will deprive Israel of peace until they free themselves from the shackles of the occupation that has dehumanized them and robbed them of their dignity.
Coexistence is not one of many options; it is the only option. The Israelis must choose to live in peace or maintain a state of constant hostilities while poisoning one generation after another against the Palestinians.
Trump faces a historic opportunity. He can lay the foundation for a Palestinian state or set the stage for the next catastrophic war. His appointment of an extraordinarily supportive team of Israel gives him the latitude and credibility to persuade the Israelis that only a two-state solution offers them peace and security, and his “Deal of the Century” provides the framework to that end.
Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.