President Donald Trump’s renewed push to expand the Abraham Accords as part of a broader peace arrangement with Iran is facing skepticism from analysts and regional observers, many of whom believe Arab and Muslim countries are unlikely to normalize ties with Israel while the war in Gaza continues.
Trump on Monday urged several Muslim-majority nations involved in discussions surrounding a possible US-Iran peace framework to join the Abraham Accords, a diplomatic initiative first introduced during his previous administration to establish formal relations between Israel and Arab states.
The proposal comes as Washington intensifies efforts to broker a wider regional settlement tied to the conflict between the United States and Iran. Trump suggested that countries participating in negotiations should simultaneously formalize diplomatic relations with Israel, framing the move as a historic opportunity to reshape the Middle East.
However, analysts argue that the political climate across the region has shifted dramatically since the accords were first signed in 2020, particularly after Israel’s military campaign in Gaza that began in October 2023.
The Abraham Accords initially normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco. Sudan later joined the agreement, although full diplomatic normalization with Israel has not yet been completely implemented.
Trump is now reportedly encouraging Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and Turkey to become part of the framework. Yet observers say those countries face growing domestic and regional pressure that makes such a move politically risky.
Senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and the Center for American Progress, H.A. Hellyer, said the ongoing Gaza conflict has fundamentally altered public attitudes toward Israel across the Arab world.
According to Hellyer, governments considering normalization would face significant political costs because of widespread anger over Israel’s actions in Gaza and other occupied territories.
He noted that the conflict in Gaza remains unresolved, Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank continues, Israeli troops are still stationed in southern Lebanon, and the Golan Heights remains under Israeli occupation. In that environment, Hellyer argued, normalization with Israel would be difficult to justify domestically.
The humanitarian toll in Gaza has become a major factor shaping regional diplomacy. More than 70,000 Palestinians have reportedly been killed since Israel launched its military offensive following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. The conflict has triggered widespread condemnation across the Middle East and intensified anti-Israel sentiment among Arab populations.
Yossi Mekelberg, a Middle East analyst at Chatham House, also questioned whether Arab and Muslim nations would be willing to reward Israel diplomatically at a time when many in the region blame Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government for escalating instability.
Mekelberg argued that Trump’s proposal appeared unrealistic given the current geopolitical situation. He said there was little incentive for regional powers to normalize ties with Israel while the Gaza war continues and tensions remain high across Lebanon, Syria, and the wider Middle East.
The analyst added that many countries now view Israel’s regional policies as damaging not only to Palestinians but also to broader Arab strategic interests.
Saudi Arabia remains central to any future expansion of the Abraham Accords. Before the Gaza war erupted, Riyadh had engaged in extensive negotiations with Washington regarding possible normalization with Israel.
Those discussions, however, stalled after Israel’s military campaign in Gaza began. Saudi officials have repeatedly stated that normalization will not happen without the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
Saudi Arabia’s position reflects a longstanding Arab consensus linking diplomatic recognition of Israel to Palestinian statehood. Despite pressure from Washington, Riyadh has maintained that stance even as regional dynamics evolve.
Hellyer said Saudi Arabia’s current position appears largely unchanged despite ongoing diplomatic outreach from the United States. He argued that the kingdom remains highly sensitive to public opinion within the Arab and Muslim world, especially amid continued images of destruction and civilian casualties in Gaza.
He suggested that if Saudi Arabia eventually chooses normalization, it would likely do so on its own timeline and terms rather than under direct pressure from Washington.
Former US diplomat Barbara A. Leaf also expressed doubts that Arab and Muslim leaders would accept Trump’s proposal in the present climate.
Leaf said she did not believe the leaders who recently communicated with Trump would agree to normalize relations with Israel under current conditions. According to her, regional governments remain deeply cautious about public reaction and the broader consequences of appearing too close to Israel while the Gaza conflict remains unresolved.
Several analysts also believe Trump’s proposal may be aimed less at achieving immediate normalization and more at reassuring Israel as the United States continues negotiations with Iran.
Iran remains Israel’s most significant regional rival, and any US-Iran agreement is likely to raise concerns in Jerusalem. Observers say Trump may be attempting to balance diplomatic engagement with Tehran by simultaneously promoting initiatives favorable to Israel.
The broader negotiations between Washington and Tehran have centered on ending months of military confrontation and reducing tensions around strategic waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz. Nuclear issues, sanctions, and regional security arrangements are also believed to be part of the discussions.
Israel has repeatedly voiced concern that any agreement with Iran could strengthen Tehran’s regional influence or weaken efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Trump’s emphasis on the Abraham Accords may therefore serve both domestic and international political purposes. Domestically, support for Israel remains an important issue among parts of the Republican base. Internationally, expanding Arab-Israeli normalization would allow Washington to present itself as a key architect of regional diplomacy.
Still, the current regional atmosphere appears far more hostile to normalization efforts than during Trump’s first term.
When the Abraham Accords were initially announced, some Arab governments justified the agreements by arguing they could help prevent further Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory and create new opportunities for regional cooperation.
Today, however, many Arab citizens see normalization as increasingly incompatible with solidarity toward Palestinians.
The war in Gaza has also triggered mass protests, diplomatic disputes, and growing criticism of Israel in international forums. Public opinion surveys across the Middle East have shown declining support for normalization since the conflict began.
At the same time, several Arab governments remain focused on domestic stability and economic priorities, making controversial foreign policy decisions more difficult.
Pakistan and Turkey, both specifically mentioned in discussions surrounding Trump’s proposal, have historically supported the Palestinian cause and frequently criticized Israeli military actions.
Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has sharply condemned Israel’s operations in Gaza, while Pakistan does not officially recognize Israel and continues to tie any future diplomatic relations to Palestinian statehood.
Jordan and Egypt already maintain formal peace treaties with Israel, but both governments have faced domestic criticism over their relations with Tel Aviv amid the Gaza war. Public anger in both countries has intensified since the conflict began.
Qatar, meanwhile, has positioned itself as a mediator in regional diplomacy and maintains ties with Hamas leadership, making immediate normalization with Israel politically complicated.
For now, analysts believe Trump’s Abraham Accords proposal is unlikely to gain major traction unless there is a significant shift in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Without progress toward a Palestinian state or an end to the Gaza war, regional governments may continue resisting US pressure to expand diplomatic ties with Israel.
The proposal nonetheless highlights how the Abraham Accords remain central to Trump’s broader Middle East strategy, even as geopolitical realities have become more complex than during his first presidency.
