MENA Strategic Bulletin

Gaza ceasefire talks relaunch in the shadow of Trump proposal

Ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas are entering their second phase, with high-level discussions taking place between figures from the Qatari government, Israeli and Hamas officials, and US representatives. This stage of the negotiations comes as the US winds down efforts to provide substantial humanitarian aid and supplies for Gaza’s recovery as part of Trump’s 90-day aid freeze.

President Donald Trump’s suggestion this week that Palestinians from Gaza be resettled in neighbouring countries will further complicate negotiations. Trump proposed that the US take “ownership” of Gaza, with the goal of redeveloping the area into a luxurious, “world-class” destination, and did not rule out involving US military to oversee the transformation.

Trump’s plan was praised by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “good” and “remarkable” idea. Hamas has strongly condemned Trump’s statements, calling them a recipe for regional chaos.

Elsewhere, the Trump administration further underlined its support for Israel by imposing sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC). The sanctions target individuals involved in ICC cases against US citizens or US allies, such as Israel, a move that echoes similar actions taken during Trump’s previous presidency.

Regional and stakeholder impact

Trump’s proposal to move Palestinians from Gaza has sparked outrage across the Middle East, with the leaderships of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt all issuing statements rejecting the move. Saudi Arabia reiterated its long-standing support for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, rejecting Trump’s plan and emphasising the importance of preserving Palestinian ties to their land. This firm response comes against the backdrop of initial discussions between the US and Saudi Arabia regarding a potential agreement for Israel’s recognition in exchange for a security pact.

Egypt and Jordan have also dismissed the notion of resettling Palestinians in neighbouring countries, stressing that such a move would destabilise the region and damage prospects for a two-state solution. These statements came despite both nations being closely tied to the US and heavily reliant on American aid.

What’s next?

Looking ahead, the ongoing ceasefire discussions are likely to focus on extending the truce agreement. Given the successful extension of the ceasefire in Lebanon until February 18, a similar outcome for Gaza is possible. However, Trump’s actions this week have increased the probability that any extension will be a short-term solution.

With global opposition to Trump’s proposal, its implementation on the ground will face serious hurdles. Saudi Arabia’s firm rejection of Trump’s plan may lead to some compromise from the US, given its transactional relationship with the Kingdom. The plan remains a significant threat to Jordan and Egypt, both of which have warned of the possibility of opening another war front with Israel if it moves forward.

Ultimately, it will depend on how far President Trump is willing to push the issue and risk further instability in the Middle East to pursue his objectives for Gaza.

What the return of ‘maximum pressure’ means for US-Iran relations

On February 5, President Trump signed an executive order restoring his “maximum pressure” policy on Iran, which previously reduced Iran’s oil exports to as little as 200,000 barrels per day, a strategy that defined the latter years of his first presidency. This time, however, the context has changed, with Iran exporting 1.5 million barrels per day and claiming to have developed strategies to counter the new US sanctions, warning that this approach will jeopardise global energy security and negatively impact consumers worldwide.

Despite the return of this hardline stance from the Trump administration, the president has expressed interest in engaging diplomatically with Iran over its nuclear programme. This approach contrasts with that of his previous term, when he rejected the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) brought in under President Obama. While Trump’s stance signals a willingness to negotiate and sign a deal, Israel is pushing to leverage Iran’s weakened position into an opportunity for regime change in the Islamic Republic.

Regional and stakeholder impact

The return of the maximum pressure policy has significant regional implications. Israel, seeing an opening after strikes on Iran’s military infrastructure, views this as a chance to deliver a final blow to the Iranian regime. Prime Minister Netanyahu has spoken of a “golden window of opportunity”, where the combination of Iran’s regional setbacks and internal struggles could lead to a collapse of the clerical regime.

However, the potential for military confrontation is high. Iran, despite its weakened position, still has substantial missile and drone capabilities and could retaliate, including a possible repeat of previous attacks on critical Gulf infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Iran has expressed interest in reopening dialogue with the US regarding its nuclear programme, seeking to leverage its nuclear “threshold status” for geopolitical gain. Perhaps aware of its weakened position, Iran is taking a more conciliatory approach, as evidenced by the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council recently stating that “Iran never meant to fight Israel directly or destroy it”. However, Iran’s regional ambitions remain robust, posing continued risks of escalation.

What’s next?

Moving forward, the Trump administration faces a critical challenge: engaging diplomatically with Iran while managing the growing risk of military escalation. The US is likely to attempt to negotiate a new deal with Iran that limits its nuclear programme, but this will require significant concessions, particularly in the form of enhanced monitoring and transparency. Major discussions and action could be delayed until the Gaza ceasefire negotiations conclude in February.

The US must act quickly, as Iran continues to accelerate its nuclear programme, and Israel grows increasingly impatient towards Iran. Trump will need to balance competing priorities: avoiding another Middle Eastern conflict, securing a verifiable deal with Iran and sidestepping pressure from hard-liners pushing for military action or regime change. The window for a diplomatic solution is narrowing, and failure to engage could lead to further destabilisation in the region.

Turkey and Syria create roadmap to boost Syrian military

Turkey and Syria have initiated talks to develop a roadmap aimed at strengthening the Syrian military, according to a statement from the Turkish Defence Ministry. This effort comes as part of a broader strategy to enhance the military capacity of the new transitional government in Damascus. Turkey’s Defence Ministry confirmed that the first meeting between Turkish and Syrian defence officials took place last week.

The announcement follows a significant diplomatic development: interim Syrian President Ahmed Al Sharaa’s first official visit to Turkey, where he met with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. During a joint press conference, Sharaa highlighted their collaboration on key regional security concerns.

Discussions are reportedly centred on a defence deal, which may include Turkish air defence and military training for Syria, along with potential Turkish military bases in central Syria. However, Turkey has downplayed reports of a formal agreement, stressing that it is premature to discuss such matters.

Regional and stakeholder impact

This emerging partnership signals a closer alignment in Turkey-Syria relations, which had been fraught under Assad. Turkey has enjoyed a close relationship with Syria’s new administration, contributing to the overthrow of the Assad regime and seeking similar support in its fight against Kurdish militias. A primary concern for Turkey is the People’s Defence Units (YPG), which Ankara classifies as a terrorist organization linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and is the main military group in the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

Turkey’s aim of preventing the SDF’s expansion and limiting the strength of the YPG aligns with the Syrian transitional government’s opposition to an autonomous Kurdish state in northeastern Syria. At the same time, Turkish-backed Syrian militias aligned with Sharaa’s Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham have been negotiating with the SDF to persuade them to give control of its territories back to the Syrian government. territories back to the Syrian government.

What’s next?

The development of the defence roadmap between Turkey and Syria is still in its infancy, with both sides treading cautiously to avoid giving the impression of overly hasty military cooperation. While Turkish and Syrian officials have acknowledged the groundwork for such agreements, they have not yet formalised any deals. As Turkey remains focused on eradicating Kurdish militants, Syria is positioning itself to regain control of areas previously held by the SDF. These overlapping priorities provide the basis for increased military cooperation.

The future of this collaboration will likely depend on ongoing diplomatic efforts and military negotiations. As tensions in northern Syria continue to simmer, it remains to be seen whether Turkey’s support for Syria’s military expansion will be enough to bring about a lasting resolution. A lasting commitment to Turkish-Syrian military cooperation could reshape the regional balance. Whether it comes to pass will depend heavily on the evolving dynamics of Syrian territorial control and Turkey’s strategic priorities.