Trump has delivered tangible results to the region

The intensity of American reactions to President Donald Trump remains intriguing. I saw it in Boston among both students and faculty during the traumatic 2016 elections. His victory was totally unexpected and there was an emotional, almost visceral response that transcended normal political disagreement. He was the establishment’s worst nightmare and they projected all sorts of fears on to him. The same goes with the media. And this is still the case in his second term, with the polarization persisting beyond what I would consider rational.
Trump is unpredictable, full of contradictions, breaks every rule and it is sometimes difficult to interpret what he means from what he says. I have made the effort. I listened to 20 interviews conducted with Trump by the journalist Bob Woodward while on mountain hikes in Greece and I may have gotten a feel of some patterns. But I still cannot claim to understand him.
No matter. We in the Middle East do not share America’s emotional extremes about Trump. As allies who depend on American partnership, the region’s leaders have to adjust and build a working relationship with whoever is in power. What concerns us more is the polarization itself — when foreign policy swings dramatically with each administration for what seem like purely domestic reasons.
Trump may represent something genuinely revolutionary in American politics — a fundamental challenge to established norms and institutions. In the 2020 election, Joe Biden received more than 90 percent of votes in Washington. This demonstrated how uniformly the permanent bureaucracy opposed Trump. The intelligence agencies, diplomatic corps, civil service, media and universities aligned against him with remarkable consistency.

Trump’s method is familiar to people around the Mediterranean but totally alien to societies like those in Northern Europe or the US.

Nadim Shehadi

Trump’s response was to bypass these institutions entirely, conducting governance through personal relationships rather than bureaucratic channels. His supporters see liberation from entrenched bureaucracy; his opponents see threats to democratic guardrails. The intensity reveals deeper conflicts about who holds power and how it should be exercised. Trump did not create America’s divisions, rather he has exposed existing fault lines in the most unexpected places.
What makes Trump revolutionary is his willingness to violate every convention. He dramatically says things that provoke outrage. He bypasses normal policy processes, makes announcements via social media and uses undiplomatic language.
There is a parallel to Silicon Valley, which emerged by breaking established rules and challenging administrative authority. Rules can protect necessary standards but they can also become barriers preserving existing power structures. Americans struggle with the question: Which rules did Trump break that were arbitrary constraints and which were fragile pillars of the democratic process?
Trump operates through personal relationships, loyalty and dramatic gestures rather than institutional process. This is a method that is familiar to people around the Mediterranean but totally alien to societies like those in Northern Europe or the US. A parade of foreign leaders has been subjected to live Oval Office meetings. These would have normally been polite diplomatic photo ops for the media, but Trump turned them into reality TV on a dramatic scale.
During Trump’s recent meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince stood firm about Saudi Arabia’s conditions for normalization with Israel. Trump’s relational, theatrical approach is more Mediterranean or Middle Eastern than American institutional style.
From a regional perspective, Trump has delivered tangible results. Ending the Gaza war should have happened much earlier, but he did it as he said he would. While experts and political rivals often mock Trump’s foreign policy approach, he also delivered the Abraham Accords. Trump ignored the experts as well as the rules and whatever consensus stood in the way. He pursued direct relations with leaders, whether in Israel or the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan or Morocco. He achieved what generations of traditional diplomacy could not.
His relationship with the crown prince has followed similar patterns — partnership rather than patronage. His earlier withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal aligned with regional security concerns. His current Gaza ceasefire efforts continue the same approach: personal engagement and dramatic gestures in pursuit of the deal.
Arab policymakers have achieved significant gains under Trump — the Abraham Accords, partnership resets and maximum pressure on Iran. Yet, even while welcoming these moves, they have maintained careful contact with the Democratic Party, understanding that the pendulum will swing. The fundamental question is: Is America reliable when its foreign policy reverses completely every four to eight years based on domestic cultural wars that are unrelated to the region?

• Nadim Shehadi is an economist and political adviser. X: @Confusezeus