MENA Strategic Bulletin

King Abdullah all but rejects Trump’s Gaza plan in White House visit

On Tuesday, King Abdullah II of Jordan was the first Arab leader to meet President Donald Trump at the White House since Trump’s second term began. The meeting placed the Jordanian monarch in a highly delicate position. Despite the historically strong ties between Jordan and the US, King Abdullah faced substantial pressure from Trump, who has repeatedly urged Jordan to accept displaced Palestinians from Gaza.

The meeting came a day after Trump had publicly doubled down on his Gaza plan, saying that the US would “take over” and “own” Gaza. Trump reiterated his vision of relocating Palestinians from Gaza to “parcels of land” in Jordan and Egypt – proposals that stir deep concerns over the right of return for Palestinians who have lived in the area for generations.

Both Jordan and Egypt, key regional players, have firmly rejected the idea of forcibly resettling Palestinians within their borders. King Abdullah, however, carefully avoided directly confronting Trump, instead alluding to an alternative solution being worked on by Egypt.

Regional and stakeholder impact

King Abdullah found himself walking a diplomatic tightrope, balancing Jordan’s opposition to Trump’s Gaza plan with the strategic need to maintain strong ties with the US, a vital ally that provides substantial military and economic aid to Jordan. Trump has looked to leverage this aid to pressure Jordan into aligning with US policies, complicating the monarchy’s diplomatic stance.

King Abdullah’s restrained tone during the meeting was met by criticism on the domestic front, with many Jordanians expecting a more forceful rejection of Trump’s Gaza plan. With Egypt reaffirming its rejection of the proposal and Saudi Arabia condemning the idea, opposition to the idea appears unanimous in the region. Meanwhile, Israel continues to voice its support for the plan, with Netanyahu’s suggestion that Palestinians should resettle in Saudi Arabia threatening to damage relations with Riyadh.

Trump’s rhetoric of forced relocation is a threat not only to Gazans but also to the stability of the broader region, undermining the Palestinian right of return and potentially altering the political and demographic landscape of the Middle East.

Public opinion within Jordan and Egypt strongly opposes the idea, with both populations deeply connected to the Palestinian cause. Jordan is already home to a significant refugee population and would struggle to absorb more displaced Palestinians. Any action to forcibly resettle Palestinians would trigger political fallout in these countries and could destabilise both domestic and regional dynamics.

What’s next?

The diplomatic chess game between Jordan and the US is far from over. King Abdullah will continue to tread carefully in his dealings with the US, balancing domestic pressure with the strategic importance of maintaining strong bilateral relations. His government’s rejection of Trump’s Gaza plan, while couched in diplomatic terms, signals that Jordan will not easily bow to external pressures, but the long-term implications for US-Jordan relations remain uncertain.

As King Abdullah mentioned, alternative plans for Gaza will be discussed during a key meeting in Riyadh, with Egypt reportedly working on a proposal that could accommodate broader regional interests. How Jordan aligns itself with Egypt and Saudi Arabia in shaping the future of Gaza, while managing its relationship with the US, will be crucial to the region’s stability moving forward.

In the meantime, the situation in Gaza remains dire, and the ceasefire continues to hang by a thread. Israel’s threats to resume bombings, coupled with the unresolved issue of Palestinian captives, could further destabilise an already fragile peace process, creating an uncertain future for the region. The involvement of external powers like Saudi Arabia and Egypt will play a critical role in determining the next steps and whether a sustainable solution can be reached.

International support for Syria gains momentum at Paris conference

A pivotal conference on Thursday February 13 in Paris brought together around 20 countries, including key Arab nations, Turkey, Britain, France, Germany, Canada and Japan, all of whom have committed to supporting Syria’s transition under a process led by the Syrian authorities. The final statement emphasised the importance of backing Syria’s new leadership in their efforts to combat terrorism and extremism.

Syria’s interim leadership, under Ahmed Al Sharaa, has pledged to form a new government next month, one that aims to represent all Syrians in their diversity. Additionally, Britain has signalled plans to ease sanctions on Syria, though parliamentary approval is still required.

Regional and stakeholder impact

French President Emmanuel Macron highlighted the necessity of respecting Syria’s diverse communities as a cornerstone for stability, which would pave the way for refugees to return. EU foreign ministers agreed last month to begin the process of easing sanctions on Syria, with the UK  this week. On Thursday, France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot confirmed the EU’s commitment to swift economic relief for Syria. “We are working with my European counterparts towards a rapid lifting of sectorial economic sanctions,” Barrot said.

Meanwhile, Russia has shown interest in re-engaging with Syria’s new leadership. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently spoke with Syria’s Sharaa, marking the first direct communication since the ousting of Bashar Al Assad’s government in December. Putin expressed Moscow’s willingness to reassess its agreements with Syria under Assad’s leadership and to explore potential future collaborations with the new government, inviting Sharaa to Moscow.

Notably absent from the final statement was the US, with a French diplomatic source explaining that the Trump administration was still determining its position on Syria’s future. The backdrop to these discussions is Syria’s devastating civil war, which has resulted in over half a million deaths and displaced millions. Rebuilding Syria is expected to cost more than $400 billion, according to the United Nations.

What’s next?

The next stage of Syria’s political evolution will depend heavily on the actions of its new leadership and the international community’s continued support. The formation of a new government in Syria, expected next month, will be crucial. Its success will depend on its ability to represent Syria’s diverse population and engage in meaningful peace building efforts, with both likely to be closely scrutinised by both domestic and international actors.

The US decision on its stance towards Syria will also be critical. Washington’s future engagement – particularly concerning reconstruction aid and military involvement – will impact the viability of the transition process. The possibility of the UK and other European nations easing sanctions could further encourage other donors, with the US’s Caesar Act of particular importance.

How Syria navigates its relationship with Russia could be decisive in determining the country’s long-term geopolitical alignment. The new Syrian leadership’s willingness to reconsider past allegiances and engage with Moscow could open the door to a diplomatic conflict with the West. However, the EU and the UK’s decisions to ease sanctions is a first step towards a positive renewal of relations with Syria, and should help deter Damascus from engaging in as close a relationship with Moscow as before. 

Israel seeks second delay of IDF withdrawal from Lebanon

Israel has requested a second extension of the deadline for the withdrawal of its military presence from southern Lebanon, asking for a further 10 days beyond the extended deadline date of February 18. Under the terms of the ceasefire agreement brokered by the US and France in November, IDF troops were to withdraw by January 26. Israel also plans to remain in five military posts in Lebanon even beyond the ceasefire period, a move supported by the US. The extension is still awaiting US approval but seems increasingly likely to go ahead.

Regional and stakeholder impact

The extension is particularly sensitive due to its impact on multiple actors on the ground. For Lebanon, the issue is highly contentious, with the newly formed Lebanese government seeking to reassert its stability and sovereignty. In a presidential statement, Joseph Aoun rejected reports of a second extension, reiterating the government’s firm stance on the IDF’s complete withdrawal by February 18.

Hezbollah, incapable of military action against Israel, has directed its pressure towards the Lebanese government, urging them to take action.

In its extension request, Israel framed its continued presence in southern Lebanon as a security imperative. However, the logic behind this stance is increasingly tenuous, with Hezbollah considerably weakened and the Lebanese government seeking to rebuild. A continued Israeli military presence risks deepening tensions with both Hezbollah and Lebanon, and reinvolving France and the US, who played pivotal roles in brokering the ceasefire.

What’s next?

The next phase of this diplomatic standoff hinges on the US’s official decision regarding the extension. Should the US approve the additional delay, it could provide Israel with more time to withdraw strategically, but this will undoubtedly stoke further tensions with Hezbollah and Lebanon, who will be wary of any temporary situation becoming a status quo. With new president Joseph Aoun taking a firm stance, prolonging the IDF presence in the south risks damaging prospects for long-term cooperation between Israel and Lebanon.