President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Monday pledging to designate certain chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations, identifying the organization’s branches in Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt as particularly problematic. 

“Its chapters in Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt engage in or facilitate and support violence and destabilization campaigns that harm their own regions, United States citizens and United States interests,” according to the executive order. 

As evidence, the White House cited the participation of the Lebanese Muslim Brotherhood in the Oct. 7 terror attacks for Israel; the Jordanian chapter’s record of providing material support to Hamas; and the calls by a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to for violent attacks against U.S. partners. 

The new policy gives the secretary of state and the secretary of the Treasury 30 days to identify which branches should be designated “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” and which should be deemed “Specially Designated Global Terrorists,” another formal designation by the U.S. government that comes with less severe consequences than the FTO designation. 

According to the executive order, it is now official U.S. policy “to cooperate with its regional partners to eliminate the capabilities and operations of Muslim Brotherhood chapters designated as foreign terrorist organizations” and to “deprive those chapters of resources, and thereby end any threat such chapters pose to United States nationals or the national security of the United States.” 

The executive order comes a week after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, issued an order designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terror group, though the move is largely symbolic at the state level. 

Some Republicans have been pushing the White House to target the Muslim Brotherhood for months, though the effort stalled until a few weeks ago.  

The Muslim Brotherhood, a transnational Islamist group, gained prominence in 2012, when Mohamed Morsi — who was affiliated with the movement — became Egypt’s president, following a revolution that ousted Egypt’s longtime leader Hosni Mubarak. Morsi was then removed from office in a coup d’etat in 2013.  

A White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that he plans to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization following months of bipartisan calls for his administration to target the group. 

Trump announced the move in an interview with journalist John Solomon of the conservative outlet Just the News on Sunday morning, saying that an executive order is being prepared for his signature. 

“It will be done in the strongest and most powerful terms,” Trump said. “Final documents are being drawn.”

The White House did not respond to Jewish Insider’s request for comment on the announcement or details of the order being drafted for the president. 

Trump considered designating the Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) during his first administration, though that effort never materialized. Sebastian Gorka, who serves as Trump’s deputy assistant for national security affairs and senior director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council, has been publicly and privately urging the president to do so since returning to office, as have a chorus of GOP lawmakers, along with a handful of Democrats in Congress. 

Gorka posted on X on Sunday that the “time has come” to designate the group, which he called “the progenitor of all modern Jihadist terror groups, from al Qaeda to HAMAS.”

A Senate bill that would designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), has 11 co-sponsors, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), Sen. Dave McCormick (R-PA) and Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA). The House version of the bill has 19 co-sponsors, including four House Democrats.

Trump’s announcement comes less than a week after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, issued a declaration designating the Muslim Brotherhood and Council on American-Islamic Relations as foreign terrorist groups and transnational criminal organizations, a move prohibiting both groups from buying land in Texas and allowing the AG’s office to sue to shut them down.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in August that the FTO designation was “in the works” for the Brotherhood. 

“Obviously, there are different branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, so you’d have to designate each one of them,” Rubio told right-wing talk show host Sid Rosenberg on his radio program at the time, adding that the State Department needed to go through a lengthy “process which I didn’t fully appreciate until I came into this job.”

News of Trump’s comments was met with praise in the U.S. and in Israel, even as the details are still fuzzy over what he will be signing. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that he wanted to “commend President Trump on his decision to outlaw and designate the Muslim Brotherhood organization as a terrorist organization.”

“This is an organization that endangers stability throughout the Middle East and also beyond the Middle East. Therefore, the State of Israel has already outlawed part of the organization, and we are working to complete this action soon,” Netanyahu said. 

The Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) released a statement commending “the fact that the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology is now being taken seriously at the highest levels of the U.S. government.”

“We welcome President Trump’s statements and the growing recognition that the Muslim Brotherhood, its ideology and network pose a serious challenge to the United States and democratic societies,” Charles Asher Small, ISGAP’s executive director, said to Jewish Insider.^. 

“A formal U.S. designation would represent an important first step to confront the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States,” Small added. “This will require sustained, evidence-based policy, serious scrutiny of its affiliated structures and funding streams, and long-term investment in democratic resilience.”

Dan Schlessinger, the lead attorney for the Boim family in their lawsuit against American Muslims for Palestine regarding the murder of American teenager David Boim in 1996, told JI in a statement: “This is welcome news for many including the Boim family. The next question is what does this mean for U.S.-based, Hamas adjacent groups like American Muslims for Palestine and Students for Justice in Palestine. Our hope is they will be included in this designation as well.”

Schlessinger and his team have accused AMP in court of acting as an “alter ego” of a now-defunct group that shut down after it was found to have provided support to Hamas.

In a surprisingly chummy press conference, President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani spoke about their “productive” Oval Office meeting on Friday, yet mostly dodged questions on Israel and antisemitism.

“We had a great meeting. One thing in common, we want this city of ours that we love to do very well, and I wanted to congratulate the mayor. He really ran an incredible race against a lot of smart people,” said Trump. “We talked about getting housing built and food prices. The better he does, the happier I am.”

Mamdani said he “appreciated” the opportunity to meet with Trump and that he looks forward to working “together to deliver that affordability.”

Mamdani’s rise to mayor has drawn concern from pro-Israel and Jewish groups over his past rhetoric regarding Israel, including his inability to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which calls for violence against Jews. Mamdani has also threatened to arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York 

On Thursday Mamdani distanced himself from protestors who gathered outside Park East Synagogue in Manhattan, however he suggested that the event, which provided information on immigrating to Israel, violated international law.

In response to a question directed at Mamdani regarding Thursday’s incident, Trump allowed the mayor-elect to evade the question, ultimately taking the conversation in a different direction. It was only at the conclusion of the press conference that Mamdani returned to the subject, reiterating similar comments he has made in the past, saying that he will “protect Jewish New Yorkers.” 

During the campaign, Trump said that any Jewish person who votes for Mamdani is a “self-professed Jew hater” and a “stupid person.” However, the president let much of his apparent differences with the mayor-elect on Israel slide. 

When asked whether he would stop Mamdani from arresting Netanyahu, Trump simply replied that the two “didn’t discuss” it, refraining from any confrontation on the issue. 

Mamdani said he “desperately” wants peace in the Middle East, however, he also noted that he wanted an end to taxpayer’ dollars “funding violations of human rights,” seeming at times to gesture toward Israel without calling out the Jewish state by name. 

“I’ve spoken about the Israeli government committing genocide, and I’ve spoken about our government funding it,” said Mamdani. “We have to follow through on international human rights, and still today those are being violated.”

Trump did not interject, instead remaining cordial with Mamdani and proceeding to call him “a rational person” that “wants to see New York be great again.”

In the run-up to the meeting, the president and Mamdani had traded barbs with each other. Mamdani has vowed to “Trump-proof” New York City, sharply criticizing the president’s immigration and economic policies. Meanwhile, Trump has called Mamdani “my little communist mayor” and has threatened to withhold federal funds. 

When asked about whether he will provide Mamdani with federal funding, Trump said he plans to “help him,” adding that he believes the mayor-elect “has a chance to do a great job.” 

“Some of his ideas, really, are the same ideas that I have,” said Trump. “We agree on a lot more than I would have thought. I want him to do a great job.”

During Tuesday’s meeting between President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the leaders strengthened their relationship and confirmed the completion of several deals. Any plan to utilize such transactions as part of normalization with Israel, however, was notably absent. 

While taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office, Trump confirmed that the U.S. would sell Saudi Arabia F-35 fighter jets of similar caliber to Israel’s. At a dinner that evening, the president added that a strategic security agreement had crossed the finish line, while also formally naming Saudi Arabia a major non-NATO ally. On Wednesday, the two countries announced a strategic artificial intelligence partnership.

“The main takeaway of the visit was the normalization of the U.S.-Saudi relationship,” said Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former State Department negotiator. “[There was] very little, it seemed to me, not surprisingly, on the side of normalization to Israel. It’s almost as if Israel was sort of an afterthought this visit.”

When asked by reporters why normalization with Israel was not prioritized, Trump did not provide much of a response, instead asserting that Israel is “going to be happy.”

Observers had anticipated that Trump would roll out the red carpet for MBS on his visit to Washington. What remained unknown was whether the deepening ties between Washington and Riyadh would come with progress between Saudi Arabia and Israel, the United States’ closest ally in the region.

But the deals announced this week were made without any apparent requirement of progress toward normalization, leading some experts and leaders of pro-Israel groups to raise questions about the Trump administration’s strategy. 

“By the way this was done, President Trump seems to have elevated the partnerships with Saudi Arabia and maybe, to some degree, with other Gulf states, above pretty much all other U.S. partnerships, including Israel,” said Dan Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under former President Barack Obama. 

“So that means that other considerations, like ensuring the right incentives are still in place for Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel or ensuring that military sales are done in a way that protects U.S. interests and Israel’s security interests, may be less important than they have been under previous administrations.”

Shapiro said that while it is reasonable for the U.S. to strengthen its partnerships with Gulf countries, the deals gave away major incentives for normalization “without knowing whether it can be achieved later.” He also added that it came without guarantees from the Saudi government on limiting military cooperation with China and Russia. 

Anne Dreazen, the vice president for the American Jewish Committee’s Center for a New Middle East, told JI that Saudi-Israeli normalization could not have been achieved on this visit, adding that it was “not in the cards right now.”

“Now the paradigm is shifting where it’s about peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia being logical and good based on its own merits, when they can get the politics right and when they can reach agreement on the Palestinian issue,” said Anne Dreazen, the vice president for the American Jewish Committee’s Center for a New Middle East.

“Right now we’re not there. The politics in Israel and Saudi Arabia are not right for this,” said Dreazen. “I think President Trump realized that it wasn’t going to happen in this visit and wanted to move ahead with these deals because there’s a strong perception that making some deals with Saudi Arabia is in America’s interest.”

Dreazen, however, still believes normalization is “going to happen,” adding that she has confidence from conversations with Saudi officials that political differences will be resolved in the future. 

Trump’s decision to make significant deals with Saudi Arabia while not pressing for normalization suggests the White House is taking a different approach than in the past, Dreazen argued.

“Now the paradigm is shifting where it’s about peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia being logical and good based on its own merits, when they can get the politics right and when they can reach agreement on the Palestinian issue,” said Dreazen, a shift from how former President Joe Biden approached negotiations.

But with MBS leaving Washington with so many deliverables, it’s unclear whether he will still prioritize normalization. 

The Israelis are “going to be right to worry that the Saudis may feel like they’ve gotten everything they want and don’t have any need left for normalization,” Shapiro said. 

Following his Oval Office meeting with Trump, the Saudi crown prince told reporters, “We want to be part of the Abraham Accords, but we want also to be sure that [we] secure a clear path [toward a] two-state solution.”

Leaders of pro-Israel groups said normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia should remain a top policy priority for the U.S.

“The United States would be stronger and more secure if our major non-NATO allies worked together to promote regional peace, stability and prosperity,” said AIPAC spokesman Marshall Wittmann. “This objective would be advanced if Saudi Arabia joined the Abraham Accords, and U.S. leaders should urge it to do so.”

In a statement released on Wednesday, Democratic Majority for Israel’s president and CEO, Brian Romick, said that expanding the Abraham Accords must be “central to U.S. policy,” and urged Congress to play an active role in reviewing U.S. defense agreements with Saudi Arabia.

“Any substantial upgrade in the U.S.–Saudi relationship — including access to advanced U.S. defense systems — must be tied to meaningful, measurable progress toward Saudi-Israeli normalization,” Romick said in a statement. “It is now incumbent on the Trump Administration to use our leverage with Saudi Arabia to make real progress toward normalization.”

“There’s clearly a political dynamic going on here,” said Israel Policy Forum chief policy officer Michael Koplow. “Trump went out of his way to almost poke at the Israelis. He implied that [the U.S. is] OK with the Saudis getting F-35s but [the Israelis] want the Saudis to get a less advanced version, and he almost seemed to boast about the fact that he’s going to give the Saudis whatever he wants no matter what Israel says.”

Trump’s promise of F-35 sales to Saudi Arabia has raised questions about which model and allowances Riyadh will receive and whether Israel will maintain its qualitative military edge, which the U.S. is bound by law to uphold. To date, Israel is the only country in the Middle East to have obtained the fighter jet. 

U.S. officials and experts told Reuters that the F-35 jets the U.S. plans to sell to Saudi Arabia will lack superior features that Israel’s fleet has.

Israel Policy Forum chief policy officer Michael Koplow voiced concerns about the security aspect of the deals. 

“It doesn’t surprise me that all of these things are going ahead,” said Koplow. “What surprises me more is that some of the things that have been discussed over the past couple of days seem to put Israel in a more difficult security position, particularly this question of sales of F-35s.”

Israel’s government, meanwhile, has stayed largely quiet about the F-35 sales, though the Israeli Air Force has objected to the deal, warning that it could damage Israel’s air superiority in the region   

“There’s clearly a political dynamic going on here,” said Koplow. “Trump went out of his way to almost poke at the Israelis. He implied that [the U.S. is] OK with the Saudis getting F-35s but [the Israelis] want the Saudis to get a less advanced version, and he almost seemed to boast about the fact that he’s going to give the Saudis whatever he wants no matter what Israel says.”

In an Oval Office appearance following their meeting on Tuesday, President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced progress on multiple bilateral initiatives, including a U.S.-Saudi defense pact and Riyadh’s purchase of F-35 fighter jets.  

Trump indicated Riyadh may receive a similar jet to Israel’s advanced F-35I Adir model: “When you look at the F-35 and you’re asking me ‘Is it the same [as Israel’s]?’ I think it’s going to be pretty similar,” said Trump. “This [Saudi Arabia] is a great ally, and Israel’s a great ally. I know they’d like you [MBS] to get planes of reduced caliber, but I don’t think that makes you too happy. … We’re looking at that exactly right now but as far as I’m concerned, [both countries are] at a level where they should get top of the line.”

The U.S. is obligated to uphold Israel’s qualitative military advantage in the region, which the sale of the F-35 stealth fighter jets could threaten. The U.S. has thus far only sold the F-35s to longstanding military allies.

In addition, U.S. national security hawks have raised worries that, given Saudi Arabia’s growing relationship with China, some of the sophisticated technology in the advanced military systems could fall into the hands of America’s leading geopolitical rival.

With Saudi Arabia now the only other country in the Middle East besides Israel to obtain the fighter jet, questions remain around which model and allowances Riyadh will receive. The F-35I is Israel’s unique model; other countries fly standard F-35A, B or C models. In addition, the U.S. has granted Jerusalem customization rights and operational freedoms with the F-35 that other countries do not have, including the ability to install its own software and gear, access to deeper source code and domestic maintenance and repair authorities, all of which contribute to its qualitative military edge. 

When asked why normalization with Israel is not a prerequisite to the deal, Trump said, “Israel will be happy. Israel’s aware and they’re going to be very happy,” but did not elaborate.

MBS said Riyadh is still interested in such normalization: “We believe having a good relationship with all the Middle Eastern countries is a good thing. We want to be part of the Abraham Accords, but we want also to be sure that we secure a clear path of a two state solution.” 

“Today we had a healthy discussion that we are going to work on that to be sure that we can prepare as soon as possible to have that,” he continued.

Trump said he had not received a definitive “commitment” from MBS, but said that the crown prince has “a very good feeling toward the Abraham Accords.”

“Definitely, Mr. President,” MBS replied. “We want peace for the Israelis, we want peace for the Palestinians. We want them to coexist peacefully in the region. We will do our best to reach that day.”

Trump said the two countries “have reached an agreement” on a defense pact, without offering further details, and also noted that he expects the U.S. to reach a civil nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia, saying he can “see that happening,” but also stressing that “ it is not urgent.” He also confirmed the U.S. is working on approving export licenses for “certain levels of chips” to Saudi Arabia. 

“We may have announcements on that later today,” said Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “But that’s what we’ve been working on, is the mechanics by which something like that can be achieved. And that’s part of this broader engagement and cooperation between our two countries.” 

MBS also confirmed that Saudi investment in the U.S. will be increased, following on Trump’s visit to Riyadh for a U.S.-Saudi investment forum in May when Saudi Arabia pledged to make a $600 billion investment in the U.S in sectors such as defense, energy and technology.

“Today and tomorrow we can announce that we are going to increase that $600 billion to almost $1 trillion of investment, real investment and real opportunity,” said MBS. “The agreement that we are signing today in many areas in technology and AI and materials … that will create a lot of investment opportunities for our countries.”

Trump welcomed the announcement. “When you invest a trillion dollars, that’s national security for us too because it creates jobs, it creates a lot of things,” he told reporters. “When you hear one country is putting a trillion dollars into the United States that creates national security … that’s a real ally that will do that. It creates a lot of power for the United States.”

President Donald Trump is hosting Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Tuesday at the White House, marking the first time MBS has visited Washington since 2018. 

Trump plans to roll out the red carpet for the visit, which includes a welcome ceremony, bilateral meeting in the Oval Office and a black-tie dinner in the evening. Tiger Woods and Elon Musk are expected to be in attendance at the dinner, among other high-profile attendees. “We’re more than meeting,” Trump said late Friday. “We’re honoring Saudi Arabia, the crown prince.” 

The visit is not an official state visit, as MBS is not Saudi Arabia’s head of state; however, the crown prince holds almost all responsibility in ruling the kingdom. 

The bilateral meeting will feature high-stakes discussions on several key issues, including the sale of F-35 fighter jets, Saudi-Israel normalization and a possible U.S.–Saudi defense pact. Experts told Jewish Insider such an agreement is likely to be modeled after the assurances Trump gave Qatar in September, in the wake of an Israeli strike on Hamas in the Gulf state, when he issued an executive order stating that the U.S. will regard “any armed attack” on Qatar “as a threat to the peace and security of the United States.” 

Trump announced on Monday he would approve the sale of the F-35s to Riyadh, helping the Saudis secure a long-coveted deal and making them the first country in the Middle East other than Israel to obtain the advanced fighter jets. “They want to buy. They are a great ally. We will be doing that. We will be selling them F-35s,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. 

Concerns remain within the foreign policy community over the impact that the sale of F-35s will have on the military balance in the region and Israel’s qualitative military edge, which the U.S. is bound by law to uphold. Experts also cautioned the risks of transferring sensitive technology to Riyadh after Saudi naval forces conducted a joint military exercise with China last month. Israel has requested that such a sale be conditioned on the kingdom joining the Abraham Accords, however Trump made no mention of such a provision. 

Trump, however, is planning to discuss Saudi normalization with Israel. “The Abraham Accords will be a part we’re going to be discussing,” Trump said Friday. “I hope that Saudi Arabia will be going into the Abraham Accords fairly shortly.” 

Despite the president’s optimism, the hope of adding Riyadh to the Abraham Accords is likely a lot more wishcasting than a reflection of diplomatic progress in the region. Experts told JI that the Trump administration should use the aforementioned agreements as leverage tied to normalization, as has been the case under past administrations, but Trump is poised to take a different approach. 

The gap between Saudi Arabia and Israel remains wide. Saudi officials have said they require an Israeli commitment to a two-state solution as a prerequisite to normalizing ties, something that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — and much of the Israeli public — is firmly against. Experts told JI that after two years of war in Gaza, the security deals are likely not enticing enough on their own and Saudi Arabia may be holding out for more concessions before joining the Abraham Accords.

The U.N. Security Council adopted a U.S.-led resolution on Monday backing President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza, including the creation of an international security force, in a move that could boost efforts to advance into the next phase of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire. 

“Congratulations to the World on the incredible Vote of the United Nations Security Council, just moments ago, acknowledging and endorsing the BOARD OF PEACE,” Trump posted to Truth Social following the vote. “This will go down as one of the biggest approvals in the History of the United Nations.”

In the first phase of Trump’s 20-point peace plan, originally presented in September, the Israel Defense Forces have partially withdrawn to a “yellow line” dividing Gaza, while Hamas has returned all of the living hostages and all but three of the deceased hostages’ bodies. 

However, the plan has faced significant roadblocks, and questions remain about the feasibility of implementing the following phases, including effectively disarming Hamas and determining who will govern Gaza. 

Monday’s vote follows coordinated diplomacy between Washington and Arab partners aimed at reviving momentum behind the U.S. plan, including hosting a summit in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, last month and issuing a joint statement of support last week. 

With the adoption of the resolution, the U.N. showed a rare consensus on Gaza — 13 countries voted in favor and none against, with Russia and China abstaining. Experts told Jewish Insider that moving to the second phase of the plan now becomes more plausible — even if challenges remain. 

“The vote on the U.S.-drafted resolution is incredibly significant,” said Dana Stroul, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who added that it provides “an international legal framework for the international stabilization force to deploy in Gaza, which is required for certain countries to send forces, like Indonesia.” 

Prior to the vote, the White House has had difficulty recruiting countries to provide troops for the security force. 

“What is being proposed is an enormous logistical feat, not to mention a high-risk environment where a terrorist organization is still active, the civilian population is in desperate need of humanitarian aid and local security, and Israeli forces remain on the ground,” said Stroul. “Foreign governments are concerned about their forces being attacked by Hamas, or being caught in the middle of Israeli security operations, and want clarity on the command and control, important details like logistical support and lodging, and the specifics of the actual mission.”

A key hurdle will be defining the role of the stabilization force. David May, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said there has been confusion over whether the ISF would “maintain the peace or enforce it.” 

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, echoed the importance of determining the role such a force would play in Gaza.

“The ISF likely will have lots of participants if the mission is limited to non-kinetic roles like aid distribution, border security, guarding camps, etc., all of which are important,” said Ruhe. “But Hamas thinks it won the war, and it won’t give up without a real fight. Phase 2 will be difficult for everyone if Israel has to do all this heavy lifting, so the success of Trump’s plans depends heavily on resolving the question of who, other than Israel, will actually enforce the peace?”

With the terror group still active in Gaza, few countries have been willing to risk sending soldiers into a conflict that “doesn’t involve them,” according to May. 

“Without foreign forces on the ground, the options are either hoping that Hamas will disarm itself and give up its governance position, or leaving Israel to resume military options to do the disarming,” said Stroul.

At the same time, Hamas has sought to deter the implementation of the next phase — which calls on the group to relinquish its arms and governing authority. 

“Hamas blew by the 72 hours for returning all hostages, living and dead, and continues to attack Israeli forces,” said May, referring to commitments the terror group agreed to in the first phase of the ceasefire. “Hamas always tests the limits of agreements with Israel, and it has little incentive to carry out a ceasefire plan that ultimately calls for the terrorist group’s destruction.” 

“It should not be a surprise that a terrorist organization will try a variety of means to survive, from inflicting violence against Palestinians outside the yellow line to intimidating them into submission, insisting on distinguishing between different kinds of weaponry it may be willing to relinquish to appear reasonable, or attempting to present itself as a legitimate representative of the Palestinian national dialogue,” said Stroul.

Even as Washington and Arab governments moved the plan forward diplomatically, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and right-wing members of his government reiterated their opposition to a Palestinian state over the weekend, a stance that contrasts with the resolution, which contains language on creating “a pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.” This wording was also present in the original plan released by Trump and agreed to by Netanyahu. 

“The rhetoric coming out of Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition this weekend is incredibly ill-timed and will fuel those looking to blame Israel for failure to move from Phase 1 to Phase 2 of the plan,” said Stroul. “By appearing to renege on this issue, Netanyahu is setting himself to be on the opposite side of the Palestinian question from Trump, and risking serious daylight between the U.S. and Israel on Gaza at a high-risk moment.”

May said the inclusion of the clause “may have helped make the resolution more palatable to the other Security Council members,” but added that it will likely be out of the question for Israel moving forward.

“Following the popular support among Palestinians for the Oct. 7 atrocities, a Palestinian state on Israel’s borders is a nonstarter for most Israelis,” said May. “It is not worth it for Israel to risk the stabilization of Gaza on the lip service paid to a two-state solution that is dead in the water for most Israelis.”

Leading up to the vote, Russia had presented a counterproposal that diverged from the U.S. draft resolution in advocating that the West Bank and Gaza be joined as a state under the Palestinian Authority. 

“This is really Russia seeking any way to assert influence in an attempt to make itself relevant,” said Stroul. “Moscow sees anything that keeps the U.S. tied down in the Middle East in a state of conflict, in tension with its longstanding allies and partners, as beneficial.”

Ruhe said Russia’s counterproposal was an attempt to throw “wrenches in America’s gears.”

“Russia was conspicuously absent from the Egypt peace summit, so this is one way Moscow tries to reassert itself,” said Ruhe. “The U.S. decision to mention a pathway to a Palestinian state probably owes more to our partners’ priorities than to Russian pressure, though Moscow certainly will try to claim this as a win anyway.”

The next part of Trump’s proposal also includes the increased entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza and the rebuilding of critical infrastructure. However, like other key elements of the plan, experts said it remains contingent on Hamas’ presence. 

May said the full recovery of Gaza will remain incomplete “until Hamas is disarmed and there are troops on the ground to keep the peace.”

“No one is willing to start reconstructing Gaza if Hamas is still active on the ground,” said Stroul. “This is the fundamental choice for Hamas: it can choose to disarm and stay in Gaza, or receive amnesty and leave. But if it insists on having a say in the future governance of the Strip, then nothing beyond humanitarian aid will flow into Gaza; Palestinians will have no prospects for rebuilding their lives; and the potential for a return to open conflict rises.”

President Donald Trump is slated to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Tuesday in a meeting that experts told Jewish Insider is expected to move forward a U.S.-Saudi defense pact and sale of F-35 fighter jets to the kingdom — yet normalization with Israel, once tied to the prospect of such deals, remains elusive. 

U.S. and Saudi officials have been holding intense negotiations to finalize a defense agreement ahead of the visit, according to reports. Since an Iranian attack on Saudi oil refineries in 2019, Riyadh has sought to formalize American security guarantees, according to Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

“Saudi Arabia is an important American security partner,” said Brad Bowman, a senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “The United States and Saudi Arabia have been working toward a regional security architecture for years.”

The agreement is expected to be modeled after the assurances Trump gave to Qatar in a September executive order, which stated that the U.S. will regard “any armed attack” on Qatar “as a threat to the peace and security of the United States.” 

“Having for better or worse made the commitment to Qatar, it seems to me unfathomable that the administration wouldn’t offer at least the same commitment to Saudi Arabia and probably to other traditional Gulf partners like the UAE who over the years have often been more steadfast and reliable allies in their support for U.S. regional and global objectives,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. 

Al-Omari said such guarantees help to solidify American leadership in the Middle East and “serve to limit Chinese influence in the region.” 

“It is almost certain that Saudi Arabia will get defense guarantees in this visit,” said Al-Omari. “Providing such guarantees is the correct policy. The security of Saudi Arabia is an American interest, and is key to deter Iran and its proxies from destabilizing the Kingdom. It also sends a clear message that the U.S. remains committed to its Middle East allies.”

Should the defense agreement be formalized as an executive order, like with the Qatar deal, it will need to be enforced by the next president to remain effective. Bowman argued that any serious agreement should instead go through the appropriate process even if it takes time.

“[The security deal] is essentially a treaty that should go through the U.S. Senate,” said Bowman. “That’s not going to be quick, but if we really believe what we’re saying about the value of Saudi Arabia as a security partner … then why not take the time and build consensus and explain that to the American people and their representatives on Capitol Hill and make the case?”

Hannah said that a more formal defense pact is also in Saudi Arabia’s best interest. 

“The problem for the Saudis is that until recently, they were holding out for an actual Senate-approved defense treaty that would have made the U.S. commitment to the Kingdom’s future wellbeing a bipartisan and permanent feature of the American foreign policy landscape rather than the temporary pledge of a polarizing, mercurial, and increasingly unpopular president who will be gone in three years time,” said Hannah. “That’s a pretty public climb down and trimming of ambitions from the kind of history-making agreement and lasting transformation of U.S.-Saudi ties that MBS has been insisting that he needed for the past three years.”

“It is likely that an announcement about the F-35s will be made,” said Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “However, turning such an announcement into reality will have to contend with a number of challenges — whether the legal requirement to maintain Israel’s [qualitative military edge is met], or other congressional processes required to finalize such a deal.”

Riyadh is also reportedly seeking to purchase a weapons package from the U.S. that would include F-35 fighter jets. If agreed upon, Saudi Arabia would become the first nation in the Middle East other than Israel to procure it. 

The Trump administration has been open to such a deal this year, but questions still remain regarding the impact such an agreement might have, including on Israel’s qualitative military edge, which the U.S. is bound by law to uphold.

“It is likely that an announcement about the F-35s will be made,” said Al-Omari. “However, turning such an announcement into reality will have to contend with a number of challenges — whether the legal requirement to maintain Israel’s [qualitative military edge is met], or other congressional processes required to finalize such a deal.”

Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter said in an interview published on Thursday by The Jerusalem Post that Israel “prefer[s] that Turkey not receive F-35 [fighter jet]s from the U.S.” but said that “there’s no indication that Israel’s qualitative edge will be compromised” if Saudi Arabia were to acquire them.

The potential F-35 deal has also prompted concern on the risks of transferring sensitive technology to Riyadh while it cooperates militarily with China, a key U.S. adversary. 

“Guess what the Saudi military forces did last month? Last month, Saudi naval forces conducted a military exercise with China,” said Bowman. “That’s not a good look for a country. That’s not going to sit well with a lot of folks on Capitol Hill.” 

Bowman said that in the past, Saudi Arabia has suggested they would turn to Beijing if they couldn’t get “what they wanted” militarily from the U.S. 

Should the Trump administration formally approve the sale, it is required by law to be submitted to Congress where there is first a non-statutory, but normally respected, review process that involves leaders of the two foreign relations committees. However, it is highly unlikely for the sale to be stopped even if lawmakers disapprove, once the administration decides to formally submit the sale to Congress.

“The law provides a mechanism for Congress to try to stop an arms sale up to the point of delivery, but that requires both chambers to pass joint resolutions of disapproval and then overcome a prospective presidential veto,” said Bowman. “The Congressional Research Service noted last year that Congress has never blocked a proposed arms sale this way.”

While the Biden administration had tied such security deals to progress on normalization, Al-Omari said that the Trump White House has “abandoned this approach.”

“I think it would be folly not to insist that the ultimate integration of these planes into the Saudi order of battle be tied to normalization and a more fundamental and permanent transformation in Saudi-Israel relations and the regional security landscape,” said Hannah. 

Bowman agreed, “The F-35, to me, provides valuable leverage in getting Riyadh to recognize the world’s only majority Jewish state. Forfeiting that leverage would be unwise. I can’t imagine giving our nation’s most advanced fighter jet to a country that refuses to normalize relations with our best ally in the Middle East.” 

While experts believe Trump is unlikely to push normalization in the upcoming meeting, they say it is still something the Trump administration is pursuing. 

“The price for MBS clearly has gone up after two years of devastation in Gaza — and more important, two years of non-stop 24/7 coverage in Arab media of Palestinian suffering and carnage,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. “MBS knows how significant his entry into the Middle East peace club will be for regional and global politics and he seems set on delivering something significant in exchange.” 

“President Trump is still committed to pushing forward Saudi-Israeli normalization,” said Al-Omari. “Yet he is also aware that the gap between the two countries at the moment is too wide to bridge.” 

Saudi officials have said they require an Israeli commitment to a two-state solution as a prerequisite to normalizing ties. Hannah said that he does not expect progress towards normalization during the trip, also adding that in the wake of the war in Gaza, Riyadh may be looking to gain more concessions before formally entering a peace agreement.

“The price for MBS clearly has gone up after two years of devastation in Gaza — and more important, two years of non-stop 24/7 coverage in Arab media of Palestinian suffering and carnage. MBS knows how significant his entry into the Middle East peace club will be for regional and global politics and he seems set on delivering something significant in exchange.” 

“I wouldn’t rule out that Trump might be willing during the visit to show greater openness and even U.S. support for the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state along lines articulated by [MBS] in an effort to inch him along a little faster on normalization,” Hannah added. “Trump’s pressure and powers of persuasion, and his ability to offer other economic and military incentives to [MBS], also might help temper the crown prince’s demands and ambitions at the margins if the side payments are significant enough.”

Still, Al-Omari believes there are other ways the Trump administration could utilize the upcoming meeting to gain progress towards this goal.

“Instead, the U.S. should explore areas of economic cooperation between the two countries,” said Al-Omari. “That may fall short of full normalization, but would lay the groundwork for future progress.”

Weeks after President Donald Trump announced a 20-point peace plan to end the war in Gaza, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday that this could be a “new moment of hope and possibility.” But it will only be successful if there is “a level of organization” applied to the implementation, a lesson that can be drawn from the Oslo process, she said.  

“One thing that can be learned from the Oslo process and applied to the situation now with the peace plan is that there was a process,” Clinton said during a panel hosted by Columbia University’s Institute of Global Politics. The event commemorated the 30th anniversary of the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was murdered by Yigal Amir, a right-wing extremist, soon after signing the Oslo II Accords peace agreements with then- Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat in 1995 — two years after the signing of the Oslo I Accords. 

“You have to have a level of organization, it can’t just have few people at the top — whether it be a president or special envoy, as necessary as they are, you have to have teams of people who can be working with their counterparts,” continued Clinton, who is a professor of international and public affairs at Columbia. 

As phase two of Trump’s plan is still being formulated, Hillary Clinton said the “devil is in the details” to determine its success. “Who’s gonna hammer out those details? Who’s going to be there going over maps?” she said. 

“In the plan are many of the same goals as the Oslo process,” she continued. “But it starts from a different perspective. The region is different. Israeli leadership is different. Palestinian leadership is not different and that has to change. There are a lot of lessons that can be learned. Understand some of the procedural lessons that will enable us to build more of an infrastructure of peace going forward.”

The panel discussion also featured Jacob Lew, former U.S. ambassador to Israel; Israeli journalist Nadav Eyal; and former diplomat and Middle East envoy Dennis Ross. It was moderated by Keren Yarhi-Milo, dean of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs. 

The event opened with remarks delivered by Claire Shipman, acting president of Columbia University, and former President Bill Clinton. Shipman, a former journalist, reflected on her time covering the White House during the Clinton administration. 

In 40-minute remarks, former President Clinton, who mediated the Oslo Accords signing — which he hosted at the White House — spoke about his close personal and professional relationship with Rabin, calling the assassination one of the worst days of his life. 

“We have to begin again, where the trust level is low,” Clinton said of achieving Israeli-Palestinian peace. “People in power might not be in favor of giving up on anything now.” 

Clinton invoked “Rabin’s law — that’s what we called it in the White House.” 

“We will fight terror as if there are no negotiations. We will negotiate as if there is no terror, never stop talking to people about resolving this,” Clinton said. “[Rabin] always believed peace is achieved through compromise.” 

President Donald Trump defended Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to order what the prime minister called “forceful” strikes on Hamas targets in Gaza on Tuesday in response to ceasefire violations by the terror group, dismissing concerns that the actions could upend the deal.

“They killed an Israeli soldier, so the Israelis hit back and they should hit back. When that happens, they should hit,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Tuesday evening. “Hamas is a small thing, but they kill people. They grew up killing people, and I guess they don’t stop. Nobody knows what happened to the Israeli soldier, but they say it was sniper-fire and it was retribution for that. I think they have a right to do that.”

“Nothing’s going to jeopardize that [the ceasefire],” he continued. “Hamas is a very small part of peace in the Middle East, and they have to behave. They’re on the rough side, but they said they would be good, and if they’re good, they’re going to be happy. If they’re not good, they’re going to be terminated. Their lives will be terminated, and they understand that.” 

The Associated Press reported at least 80 killed in the strikes, including dozens of children. The Israeli army said it had hit dozens of terror targets and struck over 30 terrorists holding command positions within terrorist organizations operating in Gaza.

Initial reaction to Netanyahu’s decision to strike in Gaza fell largely along party lines, with Israel’s Republican allies in the Senate defending the Jewish state’s actions as self-defense while Democrats expressed concerns that the ceasefire in Gaza could be in jeopardy. 

“You’re going to see a lot of this,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Jewish Insider of the renewed skirmishes in Gaza. “I mean, the Hamas soldiers are not terribly civilized, and the fact that there’s a ceasefire is of no moment to many of them. You’re periodically going to see them continue to shoot at the Israeli soldiers, and when they do, the Israeli soldiers are going to shoot back and kill them.”

“Eventually the really stupid Hamas members will stop doing it, because they’ll be dead,” the Louisiana senator continued. “But this is gonna happen. I mean, you’re not talking about sane people.”

Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) suggested “we ought to expect” the Israelis to still conduct operations in Gaza given Hamas’ actions targeting IDF troops and Palestinian civilians since the ceasefire went into effect. 

“Hamas is a terrorist organization. They are going to continue to commit acts of violence, and Israel is going to need to respond,” Ricketts told JI. “That’s why it’s imperative that the Gulf states work together to get an international police force to be able to keep peace in Gaza while we go through this transition.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said he felt it was “entirely appropriate” that Israel struck Hamas targets in order to protect Israeli forces.

“Because Hamas is attacking the IDF, that is entirely appropriate for Israel to defend itself — today, yesterday, tomorrow. If Hamas is attacking them, violating, obviously, the ceasefire and attacking IDF soldiers, Israel has been very clear: If you shoot us, we’re going to actually stop you,” Lankford told JI. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who offered his support for further Israeli confrontation with Hamas earlier this week, wrote on X on Tuesday afternoon that he was in “total support” of “the recent military action by Israel against Hamas.”

“Without Hamas being disarmed and removed from power permanently, there will be no pathway to stability and peace in the Middle East. Hamas is killing their opposition and consolidating their power,” Graham wrote. “If Israel believes it is necessary to reengage Hamas militarily, so be it. They have my complete backing.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) concurred with his GOP colleagues, telling JI, “If Hamas is going to strike Israel, they [Israel] don’t have a choice. They have to strike back. It’s too bad, but they don’t have a choice.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) surmised that Israel launched the strikes because Hamas was not honoring their side of the ceasefire deal by refusing to disarm. 

“I think the reasoning for it was: Hamas is supposed to be planning on disarming, but I suspect that there’s probably some portions of Hamas that don’t want to disarm, and they’re probably regrouping,” Rounds told JI. “If [Netanyahu] can take out some more of those terrorists, I think he probably decided he would do it now as opposed to later.”

“We want that ceasefire to be successful, but it means Hamas has got to give up their weapons,” he added.

Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) wrote on X on Tuesday that, “Hamas is in direct violation of the ceasefire, including deceptively & cruelly obstructing the return of deceased hostages to their families. The @IDF’s actions are a result of Hamas’ repeated violations & their targeting of Israeli troops.”

The North Carolina senator declined to elaborate when asked by JI at the Capitol about the developments, noting that he wanted to hold off on commenting further until he had been fully briefed on the situation. 

Some Senate Democrats who have been critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on the Jewish state said they hoped the latest developments would not completely upend the ceasefire deal. 

“It is very troubling,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) said of Netanyahu launching the strikes. “I give President Trump a lot of credit for really working hard to get him [Netanyahu] to accept the deal. He wouldn’t have accepted it before.”

Kaine questioned if Netanyahu was aiming to derail the ceasefire, and noted that such a development would upend current efforts by the U.S. to bring more Gulf states into the Abraham Accords. 

“My question is: Is he trying to undo the deal?” the Virginia senator asked of Netanyahu. “If he’s trying to undo the deal, then he’s got another problem, which is [that] they [the U.S.] want more nations in the Abraham Accords, and those nations have said we’re not coming in unless there is a path forward to Palestinian autonomy.”

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told JI that he was waiting to be briefed before speaking publicly, but said it would be “unfortunate if we wound up in a situation where this unravels.”

Middle East experts with whom JI spoke described Israel’s strikes against Hamas as necessary for its security, and dismissed concerns that Israel was acting without U.S. involvement or trying to disrupt the deal, while others expressed concern regarding Washington’s ability to constrain the Israelis. 

“Israel has shown considerable patience and restraint in the face of multiple Hamas violations of its ceasefire obligations, but attacks on its personnel are something no government can accept,” Rob Satloff, executive director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told JI. “Hamas’ violations are real and serious, deserving of an appropriate response.”

Mona Yacoubian, director and senior advisor of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, remained skeptical over Israel’s decision to strike. She said the operation could reflect a developing pattern where Israel takes military action with or without U.S. cooperation, and argued that Washington should be willing to adjust accordingly to “enforce” and monitor the ceasefire arrangement.

“Although we are still very much in the ‘fog of war,’ it does not appear that the United States approved the strike or necessarily even agrees with Israel’s interpretations that Hamas violated the ceasefire,” Yacoubian told JI. “We are likely seeing the beginnings of a ‘new normal’ where Israel strikes as it sees necessary. The key question is whether or not the United States will acquiesce to that.”

Gaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, predicted that the breakout of strikes was an isolated episode that would be “contained.” 

“The current escalation is concerning but not surprising. Ceasefires take a while to solidify and stabilize, whether because of accidents or because the sides testing the limits of the ceasefire,” al-Omari said. “The challenge facing the U.S. now is how to balance supporting Israel’s right to respond to Hamas’ violations while at the same time ensuring that this round of escalation does not spin out of control.”

Visiting the new U.S.-run Civilian Military Cooperation Center in southern Israel, Vice President JD Vance said on Tuesday that he is “very optimistic” about the advancement of the peace plan, but warned that Hamas must disarm and cooperate with international interlocutors, or else it would be “obliterated.” 

The vice president’s comments came shortly after President Donald Trump, in a post on his Truth Social site, threatened Hamas with “elimination” should the terror group continue to carry out violence in Gaza and violate the terms of the peace deal. 

“Numerous of our NOW GREAT ALLIES in the Middle East … have explicitly and strongly, with great enthusiasm, informed me that they would welcome the opportunity, at my request, to go into GAZA with a heavy force and ‘straighten out Hamas’ if Hamas continues to act badly, in violation of their agreement with us,” Trump wrote. “There is still hope that Hamas will do what is right. If they do not, an end to Hamas will be FAST, FURIOUS, & BRUTAL!”

The president’s statement, which came hours after Vance touched down in Israel in part to keep the deal on track, underscored his growing impatience and frustration with the terrorist group.

“Hamas has to disarm,” Vance said. “They’re not going to be able to kill their fellow Palestinians. … If Hamas doesn’t cooperate, as the president of the United States said, Hamas will be obliterated.”

“But I’m not going to do what the president of the United States has thus far refused to do, which is put an explicit deadline on it,” the vice president continued, “because a lot of this stuff is difficult … In order for us to give it a chance to succeed, we’ve got to be a little bit flexible.”

Asked about Turkish troops entering Gaza despite the country’s hostility to Israel, Vance said that Israel will have to agree to any foreign troops on the ground. “We’re not going to force anything on our Israeli friends when it comes to foreign troops on their soil, but I think there’s a constructive role for the Turks to play,” he said. “They already played a constructive role.”

As for reconstruction of Gaza, Jared Kushner, who has played a central role in negotiating the end of the war, said that “no reconstruction funds will be going to areas Hamas still controls. … There are considerations in the area the IDF controls to start reconstruction of a new Gaza, in order to give the Palestinians in Gaza a place to go, a place to get jobs, a place to live.” 

Vance said that the eventual governing structure of Gaza is still undetermined, as the plan focuses on getting “to a point where both Gazans and our Israeli friends have some measure of security.” After that, he added, “we’ll worry about long term governance.”

“Let’s worry about security, give people food and medicine,” he said.

Vance said that the CMCC’s focus is on repatriating the bodies of the 15 remaining Israeli hostages, but that “it’s not going to happen overnight.” 

The administration’s push for Hamas’ disarmament is expected to face hurdles. “On the one hand, Hamas wants to avoid losing the sympathy of Turkey and Qatar and wants to avoid wasting Egypt’s desire for a political settlement that creates Palestinian unity with Hamas support,” said Rob Satloff, executive director at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “On the other hand, it is clear that Hamas has no intention of voluntarily giving up the battle against Israel, let alone voluntarily disarming.”

But while Trump threatened that “many countries” will get involved, other nations have been reluctant to send in reinforcements, despite talks of forming an International Stabilization Force, as laid out in the unfinalized second phase of the peace deal. 

At the CMCC facility on Tuesday, the vice president noted that the force is still in the process of being formed, but said no American troops will be on the ground in the enclave. There are about 200 U.S. servicemembers at the CMCC in Kiryat Gat, Israel, tasked with coordinating the effort.

Trump himself emphasized that the U.S. will not send troops into Gaza, telling reporters at the White House on Monday that “Israel would go in in two minutes if I asked them to go in … But right now we haven’t said that.”

“Many countries are hesitant to send troops to serve as peacekeepers,” said David May, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “So, it will be very difficult to find a country able and willing to strike Hamas as punishment.”

Even if Trump is able to get other countries on board to take a more involved role in defanging Hamas in Gaza, May said more firepower does not always mean better results. 

“There’s a certain value in threats and provocative language, especially from an unpredictable president,” said May. “But striking Hamas and not killing civilians requires surgical precision — something the Israelis excel in — not the overwhelming force that the United States alone possesses. [At the same time,] Hamas’ violations are mounting, and the terrorist group cannot be allowed to retake Gaza and execute its potential replacements.”

May said a return to fighting would sink any possibility of the current deal developing into full-fledged peace. The Trump administration has sought to avoid a return to hostilities and build on the momentum from phase one. Experts warned the administration is in a precarious position, balancing between keeping the president’s deal stable and preventing Hamas from reasserting power. 

“The Trump administration is trying to navigate between these poles,” said Satloff. “Taking advantage of political pressure while avoiding a showdown with Hamas without the Arab, Muslim or international troops to back it up, all the while trying to avoid a collapse of relapse into full-scale Hamas-Israel war that would undermine the president’s great diplomatic achievement.”

The vice president also spoke of the significance of Israel to him as a Christian, sharing plans to visit the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. “I pray that the Prince of Peace,” he said, using a name for Jesus,” can continue to work a miracle in this part of the world.”