Trump's approach to Hamas and Middle East diplomacy

[MIDDLE EAST] In the complicated and ever-evolving world of Middle Eastern diplomacy, few issues are as polarizing and contentious as the relationship between the United States and Hamas. As a designated terrorist organization by the U.S. government, Hamas has been at the center of numerous conflicts, particularly with Israel. However, during the Trump administration, discussions around Hamas, its influence in the region, and the U.S. approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict underwent significant changes. One key question emerged: Who speaks for Trump with Hamas?

The Trump Administration’s Stance on Hamas

Under the Trump administration, the U.S. maintained a hardline stance against Hamas, viewing it as a significant threat to peace and stability in the Middle East. This position was not new—Hamas had been on the U.S. list of designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) since 1997. However, President Donald Trump's foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, sought to bring a more direct and aggressive approach to international relations. With this in mind, Trump's administration worked closely with allies in the region to isolate Hamas politically and economically, while supporting Israel’s right to defend itself.

Despite this clear opposition, the Trump administration also pursued efforts to reshape the broader Middle Eastern dynamics. One such initiative was the normalization of relations between Israel and several Arab states, such as the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco, in what became known as the Abraham Accords. While these deals were focused on Israel's relations with Arab nations, they also sent a broader message about shifting regional alliances and the marginalization of extremist groups like Hamas.

The Role of Special Envoys and Diplomacy

Though Hamas was firmly outside the circle of direct diplomatic engagement with the U.S., the Trump administration did rely on key individuals and envoys to navigate complex relationships in the region. These figures were tasked with brokering talks, managing delicate relationships, and ensuring that U.S. interests were protected. The role of these individuals is critical when considering the question: Who speaks for Trump with Hamas?

One of the most important individuals involved in Middle Eastern diplomacy during the Trump administration was Adam Boehler, who served as the CEO of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) and was a key player in the administration’s efforts to reshape the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While Boehler did not engage directly with Hamas, his work in promoting economic development and alternative avenues for peace in the Palestinian territories provided indirect channels of influence that could potentially bypass the traditional political structures aligned with Hamas.

As an envoy, Boehler’s efforts were particularly focused on providing Palestinians with opportunities for economic development and improved living conditions, in the hopes that this would foster a more stable environment and reduce the appeal of extremist factions like Hamas. His strategy was based on the idea that economic progress could contribute to political stability, offering Palestinians a vision of peace through prosperity rather than violence.

Boehler's initiatives, alongside the broader Trump administration’s policies, also signaled a shift away from the traditional U.S. approach of prioritizing a two-state solution. Instead, Trump's Middle East strategy, while still nominally supporting a peaceful resolution, placed more emphasis on economic cooperation and aligning Arab states with Israel in a broader regional context.

Steve Witkoff’s Influence

In the broader scope of U.S. diplomatic efforts, the role of key influencers and business figures such as Steve Witkoff also came into focus. Witkoff, a prominent real estate developer and philanthropist, was involved in efforts to broker peace in the Middle East through unconventional means, particularly through the development of infrastructure projects and economic partnerships. While his connections to the Trump administration are well-documented, his role in diplomacy was more indirect, focusing on projects that could create a foundation for future peace.

Witkoff's work often emphasized the importance of building relationships that could lay the groundwork for more formal political negotiations, even though Hamas remained outside the mainstream diplomatic framework. The idea was that by fostering regional economic cooperation and creating opportunities for shared prosperity, Hamas’ influence could be counterbalanced by more moderate factions within Palestinian society.

The Complexity of Dealing with Hamas

Although both Boehler and Witkoff played significant roles in Trump’s Middle East policy, the reality is that direct engagement with Hamas was never part of the strategy. The U.S. government has long viewed Hamas as an adversary, not a partner for peace. The group's charter explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel, and its use of violence to achieve political objectives has made it an international pariah.

This position has led to a clear divide in how the U.S. and other international players view Hamas. While the U.S. continues to back Israel in its struggle against Hamas, there are other actors, including countries in Europe and the Middle East, who have explored more diplomatic avenues with Hamas in an attempt to bring about a ceasefire or longer-term resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

However, the Trump administration remained unwavering in its position that Hamas would not be rewarded with legitimacy. The administration’s approach involved bolstering Israel’s security and encouraging Arab nations to reject Hamas' violent tactics. The administration's emphasis on "peace through strength" was a reflection of this philosophy.

Adam Boehler, for instance, has emphasized the importance of creating an economic environment that encourages peace and stability in the Middle East. He noted, “We cannot underestimate the power of economic development to change the trajectory of conflict. It is not just about political agreements but also about empowering people on the ground.”

Similarly, Steve Witkoff's involvement in Middle Eastern diplomacy reflects his broader belief in the transformative potential of infrastructure and economic cooperation. Although Witkoff has not directly addressed Hamas, his advocacy for a peaceful, prosperous Middle East often involves working with those who seek alternatives to violent extremism.

In the context of the Trump administration, the question of who speaks for Trump with Hamas is not about direct diplomatic engagement. Instead, it is about the individuals and initiatives that shaped U.S. policy in the region. Figures like Adam Boehler and Steve Witkoff, through their work on economic development and regional cooperation, played indirect roles in attempting to shift the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the Trump administration's hardline stance against Hamas meant that no one, at least officially, would speak directly with the group.

The broader strategy was clear: by isolating Hamas and strengthening ties with Israel and Arab nations, the Trump administration hoped to create a new regional balance of power that would ultimately leave Hamas less influential. While the approach was controversial, it reflected a shift away from traditional diplomacy and towards economic and strategic alliances to achieve peace in the Middle East.

This approach, however, does not mean that the question of Hamas' role in the region has been resolved. As the situation continues to evolve, future U.S. administrations may face new challenges in dealing with Hamas, its influence on Palestinian politics, and its broader impact on Middle Eastern stability.