US President Donald Trump’s first month in office might have brought with it the most dramatic advancement towards sustainable peace in the Middle East in over a century.

At its core seems to be two new peace principles: firstly, a shift away from obsessive and exclusive focus on Palestinian national rights at the expense of their human rights – most basic of which is the right to flee a war zone.

Secondly, a switch away from conflict-perpetuating frameworks that are based on a zero-sum game and grievance management, towards win-win deals that are based on prosperity that lead to long-term stability.

European dehumanization of Palestinians

Indeed, Trump’s Gaza relocation plan symbolizes a seismic shift in thinking. Until now, Gazans were used as pawns to promote the Western concept of Palestinianism. This came at a heavy cost: the dehumanization of Palestinians.

When there is war, people flee. Indeed, over the years, the West has been instrumental in crafting humanitarian escape routes in war-torn areas, such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. However, when it came to Palestinians in Gaza, the Biden administration, along with the EU and European governments, did the exact opposite: They forced them to stay.

Palestinians walk past the rubble of destroyed houses, in Khan Yunis, southern Gaza, March 6, 2025 (credit: REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri)
Palestinians walk past the rubble of destroyed houses, in Khan Yunis, southern Gaza, March 6, 2025 (credit: REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri)
At the same time, they cynically took advantage of October 7 to advance the concept of Palestinianism, which by now is understood to have been promoted as a counter-force to the Jewish state, and by extension to America.

European countries, like Spain and Norway, used the October 7 atrocities to recognize “the state of Palestine.” Meanwhile, the Biden administration reincarnated the long-dismissed template of the “two-state solution” and stunningly threatened to impose sanctions against Israeli Jews who seek to undermine it. 

Former president Joe Biden then endorsed a speech by Senator Chuck Schumer that defined those “heretics” opposed to the idea of a Palestinian state as “bigots.” Yet, a concern emerged: how can there be a Palestinian state if there are not enough Palestinians? 

Therefore, Palestinians must stay in Gaza, even at the cost of misery and death. To say it clearly, the state of Palestine was a more noble cause than Palestinians’ human rights. Trump’s Gaza relocation plan reverses this inhumane policy. 

The objective is no longer the Western concept of Palestinianism, but the prosperity of Palestinians as humans – be it in Jordan, Egypt, or elsewhere.

Shift from ‘divide the baby’ to win-win

The second apparent shift is from frameworks that perpetuate the conflict to win-win deals that would provide long-term stability. Legacy templates such as “land for peace,” or as it was later called the “two-state solution” – are based on keeping everybody unhappy. 

As seen throughout history, such “solutions” inevitably lead to war. Sooner or later, parties will seek to correct what they did not get in the “interim deal.” 

For example, German first Chancellor Bismarck correctly predicted that as soon as France would be strong enough, it would seek to correct the 1870s post-war arrangements and drag Europe into war. Similarly, the German grievance about the post-World War I peace led to World War II.

Moreover, the legacy frameworks used in 76 years of Middle East “peacemaking” are not only conflict-perpetuating but are also artificially Western-imposed and not organic to the Middle East.

Contrary to the views held by some European “peacemakers,” the slogan “from the River to the Green Line, Palestine will be free” is not mentioned in ancient Palestinian poetry or religious scriptures.

It is a Western invention. As one Palestinian thinker once said: “The two-state solution has nothing to do with us; it belongs to the West.”

Trump’s apparent shift from such war-perpetuating “divide the baby” thinking championed by Europe to “win-win deals” already bears fruit. The Abraham Accords are based on Arabs wishing to benefit from the crisp light emanating from Zion: peace-for-peace, that benefits all parties and hence provides stability.

This was the rationale provided by the Hashemite King of Syria, Faisal, in 1919-1920, when he enthusiastically supported efforts to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine – in the entire west bank, as well as parts of the east bank of the Jordan River.

This, Faisal posited, would benefit the entire region and lead to prosperity and long-lasting peace (he was right, but France invaded his kingdom, deposed him, and along with the British and Germans – ushered the region into a century of European-fueled conflict).

Indeed, in the coming years, the biggest challenge to Trump’s plans may not come from Arab leaders, who Trump has a lot of leverage on and understand that the Jewish state is their ally, but from Europeans and Europhile circles in the United States – the disciples of the zealous “in the two-state solution we trust” religion.

Therefore, as discussed in a previous column article, to pave the path to peace, Trump must pressure the Europeans to end their inciting, disruptive intervention in Israeli-Palestinian affairs. This, in turn, would allow Europeans to focus on their own problems.

Indeed, Vice President JD Vance dedicated his recent Munich Security Council address to the warning of the threat emanating from within Europe. 

The Israel-Hamas War and natural focus on the hostages’ release, fog what soon might be evident: The Middle East is closer to peace in March 2025, under President Trump’s leadership, than it has ever been before – this is due to new framings and thinking.

The writer is the author of a new book, The Assault on Judaism: The Existential Threat Is Coming from the West. He is the chairman of the Judaism 3.0 Think Tank and author of Judaism 3.0: Judaism’s Transformation to Zionism (Judaism-Zionism.com). His geopolitical articles can be accessed on the following website: EuropeAndJerusalem.com.