Trump’s ambitious push for a West Asia axis

United States President Donald Trump has once again placed the Abraham Accords at the centre of American diplomacy in West Asia. But unlike in 2020, when the agreements were projected as a diplomatic breakthrough between Israel and several Arab states, the current push comes amid continuing instability in Gaza, unresolved tensions with Iran, and deepening anti-Israel sentiment across much of the Muslim world.

Trump’s recent outreach to leaders of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, and Pakistan indicates that Washington is pursuing something larger than symbolic normalisation with Israel. The broader objective appears to be the construction of a strategic bloc linking Israel, the Gulf monarchies, and select Muslim-majority states under an American-led security framework.

The timing is politically significant. The unresolved Iran conflict continues to shape regional calculations due to fears of renewed confrontation. On Tuesday, the outcomes of diplomacy remained uncertain following the US’s “self-defence” strikes in southern Iran and Iran’s threats of retaliation.

However, Trump appears determined to convert ongoing diplomatic engagement into a wider geopolitical restructuring of West Asia. The renewed Abraham Accords campaign reflects Washington’s desperate attempt to restore strategic authority in a region where American credibility has weakened after prolonged wars and the fallout of the Gaza crisis.

For Trump, the Accords also carry domestic political value. Among Republican conservatives and pro-Israel constituencies, the Abraham Accords remain one of the most celebrated achievements of his earlier presidency. Expanding them allows Trump to project himself as a leader capable of reshaping West Asian geopolitics while reinforcing America’s alliance network.

Several Gulf states increasingly view limited security cooperation with Israel as strategically useful, particularly in balancing Iran’s regional influence. The UAE and Bahrain have already normalised relations with Israel, while Saudi Arabia has periodically signalled openness despite slowing visible movement after the Gaza war intensified public anger across the Arab world.

This explains why Trump is now encouraging Muslim-majority countries to move collectively rather than individually. Reports that a recent American proposal during a conference call was met with silence from several participants, including Pakistan, reflected the political sensitivity surrounding the issue.

Pakistan in a bind

No country illustrates this dilemma more sharply than Pakistan. Islamabad today faces perhaps the most complicated strategic balancing act in the Muslim world. On one side lies American dictate and the compulsion for stable ties with Washington. On the other side lies the danger of domestic political upheaval if Pakistan appears willing to recognise Israel without a credible Palestinian settlement.

Pakistan’s official position has remained unchanged for decades: recognition of Israel can only come after the creation of an independent Palestinian state. Inside Pakistan, the Palestine issue is linked not merely to foreign policy but also to ideology, religion, and national identity.

Successive Pakistani governments have also linked Palestine with Kashmir, arguing that both represent unresolved issues of Muslim self-determination. Any move towards recognising Israel without progress on Palestine could weaken Islamabad’s diplomatic position on Kashmir and expose it to charges of political inconsistency.

Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif already governs amid economic distress and serious political instability. Imran Khan’s continued popularity despite imprisonment means that any perceived concession on Israel could rapidly become a political weapon against the Sharif government. It may be recalled that Khan recognised the danger when he refused to join the Abraham Accords during Trump’s earlier presidency.

Pakistan’s military establishment is equally aware of the risks. Unlike Gulf monarchies, Pakistan cannot easily absorb mass religious mobilisation. Public sentiment on Palestine remains deeply emotional. Recognising Israel without visible progress on Palestinian statehood could trigger protests led by Islamist organisations and opposition parties.

This is why many analysts now describe Pakistan as caught in a strategic trap. Islamabad requires stable relations with Washington, financial support from international institutions, and continued engagement with Gulf allies. Yet yielding to American pressure on Israel, which is inevitable, could generate internal instability severe enough to threaten political order. Senator Lindsey Graham’s warning of possible consequences for future US-Pakistan ties if Islamabad refuses to cooperate has only intensified anxieties within Pakistan’s establishment.

The implications of Trump’s renewed push extend beyond Pakistan. Across Asia, the expansion of the Abraham Accords could reshape regional alignments. India may emerge as one of the beneficiaries because New Delhi already maintains close strategic ties with both Israel and the major Gulf states. A broader West Asian framework involving Israel, the Gulf nations, and India could strengthen trade corridors and energy cooperation.

China, however, may view these developments cautiously. Beijing has invested heavily in balancing ties with Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states. A more visible American-led regional bloc centred around Israel would complicate Chinese calculations and intensify strategic competition in West Asia.

For Iran, the Accords increasingly appear less like a peace initiative and more like an effort at strategic encirclement. Ironically, an initiative originally promoted as a framework for regional peace may ultimately deepen geopolitical polarisation across the Muslim world.

These governments may pursue strategic cooperation with Israel, but public opinion across much of the Muslim world continues to be shaped by Gaza, Palestine, and historical memory.

For Pakistan, the issue has become significantly larger than merely recognising Israel diplomatically. But embracing the Abraham Accords without meaningful progress on Palestine could trigger political consequences that neither the civilian government nor the military establishment may be prepared to contain.

(The writer is a Shimla-based strategic affairs columnist and senior political analyst)