Tuesday in Riyadh was all about Donald Trump’s love for Mohammed bin Salman. The 78 year-old president and the 39 year-old prince exchanged warm and affectionate glances. Trump recalled the crown prince’s first visit to the White House eight years ago. How could a 31 year-old prince be so brilliant, Trump asked himself and his host? It’s no wonder when he has such a wonderful father as Salman, and comes from such a glorious family. Delirious applause from the audience.
The last time that a tyrant heard such loving words from the leader of the free world was in 2019, in Singapore, after Trump’s meeting with the bloodthirsty dictator of North Korea. He offered the tyrant to turn the coastline of his capital Pyongyang into a "Riviera", of course. Later, he would talk about their correspondence. The tyrant sent him a "love letter".
How can such effusive outpourings be explained? Are they sincere? Are they public relations tricks? Are they a result of Trump’s natural inclination towards tyrants, preferably rulers for life? He once spoke longingly of the success of Chinese dictator Xi Jinping in ridding himself of the limitations on his term in office. That was before he himself started to speak, even if only half seriously, of his wish to stay on for a third term in the White House (the US Constitution rules that out).
The president as salesman
Of course, the easy answer has to do with Trump’s famous "bottom line". The Saudis are promising to invest $600 billion in the US, and Trump himself toys with the number "trillion", and promises that the American businesspeople accompanying him "will leave here with checks in their hands."
The idea of the president as salesman isn’t new, or unusual in the diplomatic world. Margaret Thatcher, at the height of her power as prime minister of the UK, would say that this was her main mission when she travelled abroad: to sell British products. Indian prime minister Narendra Modi demands of his hosts that they should send their businesspeople to "produce in India." Previous US presidents, such the senior George Bush, acted similarly, although with very limited success.
If there is substance to the promises to buy US arms to the tune of $142 billion (double the Saudi defense budget), and advanced technology worth $80 billion, and Boeing aircraft for $5 billion, and energy and healthcare equipment and infrastructure projects in the many billions, that is certainly enormous success. Not all diplomacy has to be judged for its success in achieving abstract goals. Bread and butter are a central part of it.
The Qatari plane on the political radar
Another answer is to do with the success of the kings and emirs in targeting Trump’s weaknesses: his greed, and his pursuit of honors.
The luxury plane that Qatar is gifting to Trump now appears on the radar of the media and politics in the US to an extent that diverts attention from almost every other aspect of his visit. The leader of the Democrat minority in the Senate is threatening to delay the complicated confirmation process of Trump’s appointments to the Department of Justice until he receives a detailed explanation of the legal implications of the Qatari gift. The Department of Justice has a major role in Trump’s plans for expanding his powers, expelling immigrants, and enforcing norms of law and order.
Even within Trump’s own party doubts have arisen. A conservative Republican senator from Texas, who supports the president, though not enthusiastically, spoke on Tuesday of his concerns about Qatar’s record of supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. Serious doubts arise about the very idea of this gift. It is not meant to remain in the hands of Trump’s heirs, but to pass to the "Trump Library", when that is set up. At any rate, this is not a gift to the US, but a gift to Trump. Can a president receive gifts from foreign countries? According to the Constitution, the answer is an unambiguous "No."
On social media, a reminder is doing the rounds of a speech Trump made in 2017. At that time, he supported a Saudi-UAE initiative to isolate Qatar and boycott it. He called Qatar a supporter of terrorism. But since when should Trump be taxed with things he himself said?
Distancing from Israel
Many Israelis are upset, or at least scratching their heads, at Trump’s decision to remove sanctions on Syria so that "it will be great"; or his call for an immediate end to the war in the Gaza Strip; or his remark about the habit of people in the Middle East of bombing each other until they cease to exist.
It’s pretty clear who is bombing whom until they cease to exist. For days, the headlines in the US press and media have highlighted more and more the fate of Gazan residents. Not only is the president refraining from manifestations of approval and understanding of Israel; not only has he omitted Israel from his Middle East itinerary; he is even mocking Israel, and arousing the impression that he is distancing himself from her.
Israel has few pieces on the board
One comfort is that Trump’s public persona is nothing but a collection of verbal and physical gestures. He never stops giving some impression, this way or that. First he arouses it, then he retracts, or at least cools the initial enthusiasm. Remember "Liberation Day," April 2, when he imposed penal tariffs on the entire world?
But comfort is not a serious diplomatic response. Israel is discovering that it has far fewer pieces on the chess board. It stands no chance of competing with MBS’s trillion dollars, or the Emir of Qatar’s flying palace.
It could of course try building a huge statue of Trump, placing it on the top of the Carmel, calling it, say, "The Statue of Liberty", and hoping that Trump will come to the unveiling on a US warship, full of gratitude. That’s one possibility. Another, perhaps more reasonable, is to persuade Trump that Israel is an asset, if not economic, then at least diplomatic and strategic.
Israel also desperately needs to disappear for a while from the daily quota of bad news laid on the president’s desk. It should always be borne in mind that an outstanding characteristic of this president is extraordinary impatience. If he hears a forecast based on Israeli military sources that "it will take two years to finish off Hamas" (Channel 12), it’s highly unlikely that he will give such a plan his consent.
Another red line
His impatience raises the probability that the president will cross red lines. He does it day after day, and not just in relation to the Middle East and Israel.
In December 1988, in the last days of the presidency of Ronald Reagan, the US removed its ban on direct contact with the PLO only after Yasser Arafat publicly declared that he was prepared to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Trump removed the ban on direct contact with Hamas almost nonchalantly. We have heard no criticism or reservations from Republicans in Congress.
The president is pulling in a dangerous direction as far as Israel is concerned, mainly because no-one can predict how far he will go from the red line. Perhaps we should be thankful that the Iranians don’t understand the potential. If they were to invite Trump to Teheran to meet the Supreme Leader, they would win him over instantly. Perhaps they’ll still do it.
Published by Globes, Israel business news - en.globes.co.il - on May 14, 2025.
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd., 2025.