Hope Jzr: Ladies and gentlemen, friends of Jazair Hope, good evening and welcome to today’s discussion. I sincerely appreciate your presence as we dive into an essential conversation with Professor Ilan Pappé, a renowned historian and expert on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ilan, this marks your third time joining us, and it is a pleasure to have you here once again.
Ilan Pappé: Thank you, Hope. It is always a pleasure to be on your platform and to hear the voices advocating for justice and liberation.
Hope Jzr: Today, we will examine the broader geopolitical implications of Donald Trump’s return to office. We will explore U.S.-Israel relations, regional power shifts following the ceasefire in Gaza and the collapse of Bashar Assad’s rule in Syria, as well as Trump’s broader foreign policy outlook. Let’s begin with the first question.
Hope Jzr: Will Trump continue supporting Israel unconditionally, or is this support just political and might change depending on how things evolve?
Ilan Pappé: That is a crucial question. So far, in his second term, Trump has maintained the same level of unconditional support for Israeli policies as in his first term. This includes endorsing Israeli annexationist policies in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and a lack of condemnation for Israeli actions in Gaza.
However, there is a notable difference: the recent prisoner exchange deal. This was not driven by Netanyahu’s will but rather Trump’s pressure. It signals that while Trump ideologically aligns with Netanyahu’s policies, he may, at times, prioritise personal victories over unwavering support.
Another key factor is Trump’s self-image. He wants to be remembered as a leader who does not start wars but ends them. This will eventually create friction between him and the Israeli right wing, which aims to continue the war in Gaza and pursue further annexation.
Moreover, Trump appears keen on securing a peace treaty between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which he may see as a ticket to a Nobel Peace Prize. Yet, he fails to grasp the complexity of Israeli politics, and his unrealistic ideas—such as relocating two million Palestinians out of Gaza—will never materialise, no matter the pressure he applies on Jordan and Egypt. While his policies now resemble his first term, the coming years may challenge his approach.
Hope Jzr: Does Trump’s trader mindset mean that he might completely change his stance and pressure Israel for a different approach to the problem?
Ilan Pappé: I wouldn’t say he will completely change his stance, but his businessman instincts will play a role. Trump prioritises America’s financial interests above all else, and supporting Israel unconditionally is an expensive endeavour.
At some point, he will realise that Israel costs the American taxpayer far more than anticipated. Within a year, I predict he will face the reality that sustaining Israel’s policies is a costly burden. The real test will be whether he chooses to maintain ideological support or follows a cost-benefit analysis that pressures Israel into a different strategy.
Unlike previous administrations, Trump does not seem particularly invested in the Palestinian issue—certainly not from a moral perspective. However, if he sees financial inefficiencies or risks to America’s regional interests, his stance might shift.
Hope Jzr: How was Trump’s reelection received in Israel? Was it good news internally, or did it trigger more divide within Israeli society?
Ilan Pappé: Within Israel, Trump’s reelection was seen as a blessing by Netanyahu and his right-wing allies. They believe Trump will support annexation, the displacement of Palestinians, and even Israeli territorial expansion into Western Syria and Southern Lebanon.
However, Netanyahu’s popularity is in decline due to multiple crises, including the hostages situation, economic troubles, and the inability to provide security. The opposition parties in Israel, particularly those aligned with liberal and centrist factions, are not as enthusiastic about Trump’s return. Many within these groups align more closely with Biden’s approach, despite its flaws.
Israel’s internal conflict—between secular, liberal Jews and religious, ultra-nationalist factions—is far more significant than Trump’s role. This deepening divide threatens the cohesion of Israeli society, making internal political dynamics increasingly volatile.
Hope Jzr: How will the politics in the region look post-Trump election, particularly after the ceasefire and the collapse of Bashar Assad’s rule in Syria?
Ilan Pappé: We are witnessing a major transformation in the region. The old political structures, shaped by colonial powers after World War I, are disintegrating. Syria’s collapse, Lebanon’s instability, and shifting power dynamics among Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey indicate a long-term process of regional restructuring.
There are two possible paths: either a new political order emerges that better reflects the region’s collective identities and aspirations, or external powers—Turkey, Iran, the U.S., and Israel—will continue intervening, exacerbating instability.
Bashar Assad’s removal and the rise of new actors in Syria are creating unpredictable alliances. The key takeaway is that the Israeli-Palestinian issue remains central to regional politics. No power shifts will be sustainable unless the Palestinian issue is addressed meaningfully.
Hope Jzr: Do you see Iran and Saudi Arabia getting closer because of their historical rivalries with Turkey, which is trying to take leadership in the region?
Ilan Pappé: The key to this relationship lies in Riyadh, not Tehran. Mohammed bin Salman is keeping his options open, balancing between normalisation with Israel (under U.S. pressure) and strengthening ties with Iran.
Trump’s approach to Iran will be a decisive factor. Unlike previous administrations, Trump is capable of striking a deal with Iran, as he did with North Korea. If U.S.-Iran tensions ease, we could see a more realistic regional alignment that includes Iran and Saudi Arabia.
While neither country is fundamentally invested in the Palestinian cause, they recognise that Palestine remains the last colonial project in the Middle East. Any durable regional order must acknowledge this reality.
Hope Jzr: Do you see the Palestinian cause gaining momentum or losing momentum after more than a year from October 7th?
Ilan Pappé: It has gained unprecedented momentum. The scale of global solidarity for Palestine today is greater than at any point in recent history. However, this momentum has not yet translated into concrete political change, largely because the Palestinian leadership remains fragmented.
The challenge is that while international support grows, there is no unified Palestinian movement capable of capitalising on this energy. If a new, coherent Palestinian leadership emerges, this momentum could lead to significant shifts in international politics.
Hope Jzr: Do you think the fear of Trump’s actions could push Arab countries to gather around a different strategy?
Ilan Pappé: Yes, and we are already seeing indications of this. Arab states are realising that a fragmented approach serves only external powers. The upcoming Arab summit in Egypt could be a pivotal moment in redefining a regional strategy that prioritises their own interests rather than simply aligning with Western or Israeli agendas.
There is a growing realisation that relying on the U.S., especially under Trump, is unreliable. Arab states must develop an independent, strategic approach to regional issues, including Palestine, that does not hinge on fluctuating American policies.
Hope Jzr: Ilan, moving beyond the Middle East, let’s talk about Trump’s foreign policy on a global scale. His relationship with Putin seems considerably better than that of previous U.S. presidents, while his approach to China has always been confrontational. How do you see Trump’s global strategy? Will he lean toward maintaining U.S. global leadership, or will he accept a multipolar world with rising blocs like BRICS?
Ilan Pappé: I see two distinct approaches in Trump’s foreign policy—one toward Russia and another toward China.
With Russia, there is room for negotiation. Trump prides himself on making deals, and I can foresee him attempting a transactional agreement with Putin—possibly something involving the recognition of Russian control over parts of Ukraine in exchange for a NATO deal with Kyiv. The war in Ukraine has dragged on, and many in Europe are exhausted by it. Trump, with his businessman mentality, might try to broker a ceasefire or settlement that preserves Russian gains while bringing some form of security guarantee to Ukraine.
With China, the situation is entirely different. His trade war with China is based on tariffs and economic leverage, and while he portrays it as a battle against Chinese dominance, the real losers could be American consumers. A tariff war does not hurt China nearly as much as it raises prices for ordinary Americans.
When it comes to multipolarity, I don’t think Trump is concerned with BRICS per se. His real frustration lies with America’s traditional allies—NATO, the EU, Canada, and Mexico—whom he sees as benefiting too much from U.S. economic and military support. While previous American administrations have tried to uphold alliances and sustain global leadership, Trump’s instinct is to pull back unless he sees direct benefits for the U.S. His slogan, America First, is not about maintaining a global order; it’s about transactional relationships where allies are expected to pay their fair share.
Hope Jzr: So, does that mean Trump doesn’t particularly care about maintaining U.S. dominance in a unipolar world?
Ilan Pappé: Exactly. Unlike the traditional U.S. establishment, which views global leadership as essential, Trump is indifferent to concepts like American exceptionalism. His policies reflect a shift toward a more isolationist America, where alliances are judged on financial contributions rather than strategic or ideological alignment.
Ironically, this attitude could accelerate the decline of U.S. global influence. By alienating allies and reducing international commitments, Trump may inadvertently make room for alternative power structures like BRICS to grow.
Hope Jzr: You touched on the economic impact of Trump’s policies. If U.S. financial struggles limit its ability to provide military and economic aid at current levels, how might this affect Israel’s approach to the Palestinian conflict?
Ilan Pappé: This is a critical question. Israel is highly dependent on U.S. financial and military aid. If Trump’s economic policies create a situation where America can no longer afford to maintain the same level of support, Israel will be forced to reconsider its strategy.
At first, Trump will likely offer Israel everything it wants—massive aid, unconditional backing, and diplomatic cover. But over time, as the financial burden increases, he may decide that Israel is becoming more of a liability than an asset.
The potential consequences could be profound. If U.S. support weakens, Israel will have to make difficult decisions: Does it continue its current path of expansion and military aggression without guaranteed American backing? Or does it explore alternative diplomatic solutions?
The Israeli government, particularly under Netanyahu, has operated under the assumption that U.S. support is endless. If that assumption is challenged, we could see shifts in Israeli policy—perhaps reluctantly engaging in peace negotiations or seeking new regional alliances.
Hope Jzr: Let’s turn to domestic U.S. politics. Trump has had a contentious relationship with what some call the Deep State—the established political and bureaucratic institutions in Washington. How do you see this relationship evolving in his second term?
Ilan Pappé: The most concerning aspect of Trump’s return is not just his own policies but the people surrounding him. Figures like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and other powerful tech and media moguls are aligning themselves with Trump’s administration. This raises serious concerns about freedom of speech, media control, and corporate influence over governance.
Trump’s dismantling of USAID—the soft-power arm of U.S. influence—is another sign of his shift away from traditional global engagement. While some may argue that U.S. foreign aid was often a tool for advancing American interests rather than genuine humanitarian assistance, its sudden removal creates a vacuum.
If Trump continues to gut these institutions, it will accelerate the decline of American global influence. However, this also presents an opportunity for alternative international structures to emerge. Countries in the Global South—particularly in the Arab world, Latin America, and Asia—should seize this moment to build independent alliances that are not reliant on U.S. intervention.
Hope Jzr: That leads us to a critical question: What kind of resolution do you see for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Netanyahu has outright rejected the idea of a Palestinian state, while Saudi Arabia has conditioned normalization on Palestinian statehood. Where do you see this heading?
Ilan Pappé: The two-state solution is dead. It has been for a long time, but many governments still pretend it’s an option. It’s simply not a realistic outcome anymore.
The only viable solution is a single democratic state where all people—Jews and Palestinians—have equal rights. This would involve dismantling the structures of apartheid and allowing Palestinian refugees to return.
I know this sounds radical to many, but history has shown us that deeply entrenched colonial projects can be dismantled. Algeria is a prime example. It was once unthinkable that French settlers would leave and that Algeria would regain its sovereignty. Yet, it happened.
Palestine’s future must be integrated into the broader Arab world. The notion of maintaining a Jewish-only state in the heart of the Arab region is unsustainable. It only survives through military force, but force is not a permanent solution. Eventually, there will have to be a reckoning.
Hope Jzr: Ilan, to conclude: Is the world better under Trump’s leadership, or are we simply witnessing the end of a very bad period in global history?
Ilan Pappé: The world is not in a better place under Trump. But I do believe we are approaching the end of a very bad period.
We have seen unchecked neoliberalism, global economic inequality, environmental destruction, and a rise in authoritarianism. However, I also believe that this extreme moment of crisis will eventually force a transformation. History has shown us that when things become unbearable, people push for change.
Palestinians, for example, are experiencing some of the darkest times in their history, but their cause has also gained unprecedented global momentum. Mass protests, political awareness, and shifting narratives are all indicators that change is possible.
Similarly, Trump’s policies may accelerate the decline of American global dominance, but that decline could create opportunities for new, fairer international alliances to emerge. It’s a painful transition, but one that might lead to a more just world.
Hope Jzr: Ilan, as always, it was a pleasure speaking with you. Your insights bring so much depth to these discussions.
Ilan Pappé: Thank you, Hope. It’s always great to be on your platform, and I look forward to our next conversation.
