Left Off the Itinerary, Reinforced for Battle: How Trump’s Gulf Gambit Secretly Fortified Israel

President Donald Trump’s four-day Middle East tour, which included stops in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates — but conspicuously omitted Israel — was widely interpreted as sidelining America’s closest regional ally.

Yet, beneath the surface of diplomatic optics, there was a deliberate strategy aimed at strengthening a broader anti-Iran coalition and ultimately reinforcing the enduring US–Israel partnership. By cultivating economic and security ties with Gulf monarchies while cautioning against over-reliance on these often-volatile regimes — and by engaging Syria’s new Islamist-led government with a wary eye toward its unpredictability — Washington recalibrated its regional engagement in a way that safeguards both American and Israeli interests.

The tour’s centerpiece was a suite of investment and defense agreements reportedly amounting to over $700 billion, a figure that, while inflated by non-binding memoranda, underscores the administration’s transactional approach to diplomacy. By emphasizing concrete deals in aviation, artificial intelligence, and energy, the United States sought to bind Gulf states more closely to its strategic orbit, creating an environment in which Israel’s security is bolstered by a network of moderate Arab partners sharing a common concern over Iranian hegemony.

Yet the Gulf is far from monolithic or immutable. The ruling houses in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi preside over monarchies riddled with human rights abuses and opaque power struggles, where secretive succession protocols threaten sudden policy reversals.

Saudi Arabia’s al-Saud clan, despite cosmetic “Vision 2030” reforms, continues to enforce the restrictive kafala labor system and quash dissent, leaving its internal transition vulnerable to elite infighting. In Abu Dhabi, appointing the president’s son as crown prince does little more than entrench a repressive regime and underscores how swiftly top-level changes can unsettle long-term commitments. Even Qatar — though it hosts the region’s largest US base — juggles covert support for Islamist factions and fluctuating ties with Iran and Turkey, demonstrating how easily Doha’s allegiance could shift and undermine Washington’s strategic plans.

Moreover, the tour’s engagement with Syria — marked by Trump’s meeting with interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa and the announcement of lifted US sanctions — raises additional concerns. Syria’s new government, born of war and shaped by Islamist factions, remains fragile; sporadic violence and extremist cells continue to threaten stability, illustrating how quickly alliances can unravel in Damascus. 

Although lifting sanctions on Syria may disrupt Iran’s so-called “axis of resistance” by drawing Damascus away from Tehran, the long-term reliability of al-Sharaa’s regime is far from assured, and a swift reversal could leave Israel and the United States exposed to renewed chaos.

Against this backdrop of cautious engagement, Israel’s strategic autonomy emerges as a critical asset. Israel possesses one of the world’s most advanced defense and intelligence capabilities, enabling it to manage localized threats even as Washington brokers broader coalitions. Congressional appropriations continue to help aid an Israeli qualitative military edge with funding for Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow systems, underscoring that US commitment to Israel’s defense remains unwavering. These guarantees ensure that — even if Gulf partners falter — Israel’s security is anchored by direct American support.

Importantly, building ties with Gulf states need not come at the expense of Israel’s primacy in US policy. Rather, it can broaden the coalition confronting Iran’s regional ambitions and diminish extremist recruitment by promoting economic development and stability. Gulf investment projects in tourism, technology, and infrastructure can undercut the socioeconomic conditions that feed radical ideologies, indirectly reducing threats to Israel and US interests alike. Yet policymakers must safeguard against potential asset forfeiture by encouraging transparent governance reforms in Gulf monarchies — such as codified succession rules and enhanced civil institutions — that mitigate the risk of abrupt policy reversals.

Syria exemplifies the perils of overoptimism in diplomatic outreach. While normalizing ties with Damascus could theoretically fragment Iran’s proxy network, the historical pattern in Syria is one of rapid shifts—from Assad’s authoritarianism to rebel fragmentation, to Iranian and Russian entrenchment, and now to an Islamist-led interim administration. Each transition has altered the balance of power, and any assurance today is contingent upon al-Sharaa’s ability to maintain unity among disparate factions. A resurgence of extremist violence or a capitulation to hardline elements would not only nullify recent US gains, but also pose fresh dangers to the region and Israel’s northern frontier.

Recognizing the inherent fragility of Gulf and Syrian regimes, American decision-makers must tread carefully — engaging pragmatically with regional partners, yet never losing sight of the fact that Israel remains the most reliable guarantor of stability in a tumultuous region. By maintaining this dual approach, the United States can fortify an expanded security architecture that delivers enduring peace and protects its most vital ally.

Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx