لحظة ادراك

 

.Dancing With the Devil Requires Knowing His Favorite Tune

The curtain has fallen on Donald Trump’s most controversial visit to the Arab region. After a 72-hour trip, he headed back to Washington, D.C., triumphant and loaded with some of what he had hoped to reap—Arab wealth. It was the largest “collection campaign” (investment, as they called it), yet left vast segments of the Middle East disillusioned. Their grand hopes—built upon political castles in the air—mostly amounted to unrealistic fantasies that this visit might offer a glimmer of hope for addressing the region’s chronic crises and securing stability.

From those being killed, starved, and dying of thirst and disease in Gaza—symbol of a century-old cause—to hopes for resolving the Iranian nuclear file and the chronic migraine it causes Israel and the Gulf states, many thought this trip might mark a turning point. Some even believed it might drive a wedge into the U.S.-Israeli alliance. But in truth, this visit was designed from the outset as Trump’s largest financial raid (investment pitch) on the wealthiest nations in the region, accompanied by a carefully coordinated disinformation campaign mobilizing major Western and Arab media, abetted by Netanyahu’s government—except for one naive minister left out of the loop.

There was a frenzied competition among three Gulf states to outdo one another in raising the stakes—investment deals, gift value, and contract numbers. Economists estimate the total value reached $3.7 trillion. Social media platforms and media outlets buzzed with these astronomical figures.

To avoid falling into a simple "for or against" binary, the discussion must be grounded in one essential question: Have the Gulf rulers finally learned the favorite tune for dancing with Donald Trump?

To understand Trump’s policies for the next four years, one must grasp that they revolve around the decoupling of issues and a literal application of deal-making logic. Every country is treated as a separate file with its own criteria. The era of “bundled policy approaches” is over. What suits Saudi Arabia doesn’t suit Qatar. What works for Qatar doesn’t fit the UAE. And so on. Going forward, both politics and economics will follow this fragmented logic.

He began with the economy, right in Washington, assigning each country its own tax code and pricing scale based on their deal negotiations. The U.S. will no longer treat the EU as a unified bloc, nor NATO as a collective defense alliance, nor China as part of the BRICS coalition with strategic ties to Russia. His approach is simple: the U.S. can no longer afford the political or financial costs of collective engagements. Instead, tailored policies and bilateral deals will prevail—and all blocs, including the Arab League, must be ready.

Economy was front and center in this visit, while politics was absent—because these three states had already accepted Trump’s definition of a “deal.” Though flush with cash, their economic priorities remain domestic. There are no real Gulf-wide projects beyond paperwork and empty declarations from the Gulf Cooperation Council. Basic areas like health, education, clean energy, peaceful nuclear programs, desalination, and electricity have never matured into shared regional ventures, despite their simplicity.

If this is the state of the economy with financial abundance, what hope is there on the political front, which lacks leverage?

Trump certainly didn’t hear a unified Gulf vision for Gaza or the broader Palestinian question, nor for the Iranian nuclear file. On Yemen, Sudan, and others, the divisions are just as stark. The one exception was Syria—where Gulf states, supported by Turkey and with quiet Israeli approval, managed a rare unified stance. Contrary to media narratives, new Syrian leader Ahmed Shar’a offered multiple reassurances to Israel, not least the arrest of Talal Naji, head of the PFLP-GC, allegedly to aid in recovering the remains of a soldier killed in Lebanon in 1982. Turkish and Qatari efforts reportedly played a key role here, even recovering items once belonging to the Israeli spy Eli Cohen.

But the political stage in the Middle East is not yet ready for breakthroughs. Netanyahu hasn’t resolved any of his wars to lay groundwork for Trump’s deal-making. Israel is bogged down in its assault on the Palestinians. Its war in Lebanon is still undefined. The new Islamic regime in Syria won’t easily fit into Netanyahu’s plans—his experience with Hamas is cautionary, despite Arab and regional guarantees.

The Houthis in Yemen now possess the power to paralyze Israeli life for hours daily if they choose. Iraq is still a powder keg. And Iran—the rusting, smoldering crescent tip—despite setbacks, fiercely clings to its old slogans and nuclear ambitions. Even Jordan and Egypt, formal peace partners, remain unaligned enough to offer Netanyahu any real sense of security.

Domestically, Israel is in unprecedented disarray. Trump’s visit didn’t even bring promises, let alone deliverables. Israel now faces the same existential question its founders asked 77 years ago: How do you survive in a region that fundamentally rejects your existence? And worse—today, the state is fractured internally into three: one for secularists, one for the devout, and one for settlers.

Trump and Netanyahu, nevertheless, agreed tacitly to stay out of each other’s way. Trump’s logic of deal-making and issue-splitting contradicts Netanyahu’s logic of military force and systemic reassembly. Trump cannot afford to wait for Netanyahu’s endless wars. The political divergence was therefore inevitable—each man accepted the rules of a different game, as long as they both dock at the same final port: maintaining Israel’s regional hegemony.

The Saudi normalization deal was postponed. Neither side is ready. Trump wasn’t waiting for Netanyahu’s “knockout blow,” which may never come. Why would the Saudi Crown Prince normalize with a man accused of war crimes, mired in corruption, and stuck in perpetual war? What benefit does Netanyahu even offer him?

Trump knows better than anyone: deals need political stability—and this region has none.

This visit was dense with imagery—from the competition over the grandest reception, a long-standing Arab tradition even on an individual level, to the glamorous optics. But Arab social media reminded the world that Trump had insulted these same leaders many times—calling them weak, rich, and forever dependent on U.S. protection. They know full well that when they truly needed protection from Houthi missiles during Trump’s first term, he pulled Patriot missile systems out of Saudi Arabia.

So what logic justifies these deals?

More puzzling, whenever such critiques arise, Gulf columnists and defenders rush to smear the critics—either accusing them of jealousy or arguing that Gulf states are free to spend their money as they wish. But if Gulf leaders truly believe in what they’re doing, they have utterly failed to explain it to their own people or to the wider Arab world. Were these payments to appease Trump’s crudeness? To keep him from siding with regional rivals? Or are they truly necessary investments in defense and development?

In Conclusion:

Let’s look past the photos and pageantry of Trump’s Gulf visit. Anyone trying to distract us with images of white marble, majestic welcomes, and lavish gifts doesn’t want you to see what’s really going on.

In truth, Trump and Netanyahu masterfully staged a political split. While Trump inked astronomical deals and played the tax collector, Netanyahu quietly escalated the toll of blood, hunger, and thirst in Gaza.

Politics was absent; economy ruled.

The scent of perfume and flowers, the music, the folkloric dances and grand salons of mega-deals—none of it matches the stench of gunpowder, death, and stagnant water. This was a division of files and divergent voyages—no political strings attached to the cash and investments.

They want you to believe Trump and Netanyahu are separate stories. That the bombs falling on Gaza and the jets flying them have nothing to do with Trump. That the fuel, pilot wages, and takeoff orders are unrelated. If you believe this nonsense, you’ll believe whatever nonsense comes next.

Gaza’s freedom will arrive—after years of suffering. No one will say how or when. You’re free to imagine it however you like.

And the image worth a thousand words:

The silent photo of Syrian President Ahmed Shar’a with Trump and the Saudi Crown Prince. You’re supposed to forget he was once called Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, leader of Jabhat al-Nusra. Just believe he toppled the tyrant Bashar al-Assad. Don’t bother seeking the truth or annoying people with inconvenient facts. In twenty years, one U.S. federal agency will declassify what was said at that meeting, what Ahmed Shar’a agreed to, guaranteed personally by the Saudi Crown Prince—in exchange for lifting the siege on Syria. And maybe Hollywood will give you the full tale of American greatness: how a man went from a jail cell in the Abbasid capital to the presidential palace in the Umayyad capital.