Soumaya Ghannouchi: Trump trades Gulf security for Israeli agenda, lures Washington into new labyrinth

Tunisian writer Soumaya Ghannouchi affirmed that US President Donald Trump has betrayed his traditional allies in the Gulf region by fully complying with the Israeli agenda. She explained that the head of the occupation government, Benjamin Netanyahu, succeeded in luring American military power back into the shifting sands of the Middle East, something Washington elites repeatedly vowed not to repeat since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

In her analysis, Ghannouchi pointed out that Netanyahu exploited his influence and close ties with Trump's inner circle, especially his son-in-law Jared Kushner, to direct US foreign policy towards a direct confrontation with Iran. This approach disregards Trump's promises during his election campaigns to end 'endless wars' and avoid involvement in costly regional conflicts.

The writer considered that what is happening now represents a repetition of the scenario of the neoconservatives who pushed for the invasion of Iraq under the pretext of the 'New American Century,' which ended with the decline of American hegemony and the draining of trillions of dollars. Today, Trump finds himself in the same labyrinth that his predecessors, including Barack Obama, tried to atone for and gradually withdraw from.

Ghannouchi touched upon the deep economic aspect of this relationship, where Gulf states injected massive investments exceeding $3 trillion into the US economy during Trump's 2025 tour. These funds were not limited to official channels but also extended to personal projects linked to Trump and his family, such as the 'World Liberty Financial' cryptocurrency project.

She also highlighted the role played by Jared Kushner's company, 'Affinity Partners,' which manages billions of dollars from sovereign wealth funds in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE. Despite this close financial link, the analysis suggests that Trump prioritized Israeli interests over the security and stability requirements sought by these allied and investing countries.

Ghannouchi explained that the decision to escalate militarily against Iran was made without genuine consultation with the Gulf states, even though they are on the front line and will bear the brunt of any retaliatory action. This marginalization reflects a shift in American security doctrine, which now views military bases in the region as a tool for joint Israeli-American attack rather than a shield to protect allies.

The writer conveyed the growing concern in Gulf circles, citing criticisms from Emirati businessman Khalaf Al Habtoor, who publicly questioned the extent of collateral damage that would be inflicted on the region's countries as a result of this escalation. These statements reflect a growing realization that the American 'protector' has, due to Israeli pressure, become a direct threat to regional security.

In the same context, voices of Gulf analysts such as Musaed Al-Maghnam emerged, who considered that the equation had been reversed, where the countries of the region are now defending the American presence, not the other way around. This frustration stems from a feeling that American promises of protection in exchange for investments and military bases have evaporated in the face of Israel's desire to settle scores with its regional adversaries.

Ghannouchi warned that the strategic Israeli goal goes beyond merely striking Iran, extending to a desire to create a regional vacuum and re-divide the region along sectarian and tribal lines. She cited articles in the Hebrew press that explicitly speak of 'Sykes-Picot 2026' to redraw maps to ensure Israel's absolute superiority amidst fragmented and weak entities.

She referred to the warnings of Saudi journalist Adhwan Al-Ahmari about the possibility of Gulf states falling into an American-Israeli 'entrapment' trap, where the region is dragged into an open confrontation, and then Washington withdraws after achieving its own goals. This scenario leaves neighboring countries in direct confrontation with the repercussions of a devastating war they were not party to the decision to ignite.

The writer believes that the unprecedented overlap between American and Israeli military operations has blurred the lines that separated Israel's private wars and traditional American support. Today, US forces are directly involved in implementing Netanyahu's security vision, making military bases in the Gulf legitimate targets in any widespread regional conflict.

The current policy of the Trump administration risks destabilizing the infrastructure of American influence in the Middle East, which for decades has been based on the principle of 'access for security.' By fully aligning with Netanyahu, Washington sacrifices its credibility with its partners, who represent a fundamental pillar in global energy markets and international investments.

Ghannouchi concluded her analysis by emphasizing that the lesson learned by the Gulf states has become clear and painful: the old security equation is no longer valid to protect them. While Israel seeks to enhance its influence through regional chaos, the United States finds its influence gradually eroding by becoming a tool to implement strategies that do not necessarily serve its highest national interests.

The pressing question remains in the corridors of international politics about Washington's ability to regain its balance before a full slide into a comprehensive regional war. Continuing on this path could lead to a strategic rupture with Arab allies, opening the door for other international powers to fill the vacuum that will be left by the decline of American reliability in the region.

Netanyahu succeeded in achieving what many in Washington swore would never happen again: luring American military power back into the Middle East.