Peace with Tehran made peace with Israel not just possible but strategically necessary.
On a Sunday of phone calls and social media declarations, Donald Trump sought to weave two of the most consequential threads in modern Middle Eastern diplomacy into a single knot: a nuclear agreement with Iran and the expansion of the Abraham Accords to the Gulf's most significant holdout, Saudi Arabia. The logic was one of mutual necessity — that peace with Tehran could make peace with Jerusalem not merely conceivable but strategically inevitable. Whether the architecture of ambition can bear the weight of its contradictions is the question history is now being asked to answer.
- Trump spent Sunday orchestrating a diplomatic blitz across eight phone calls — from Gulf monarchs to Pakistan's military chief — signaling that a nuclear deal with Iran and Saudi-Israeli normalization are now being pursued as a single, interlocked package.
- A leaked pre-agreement framework reveals concrete stakes: the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, partial sanctions relief, unfreezing of billions in Iranian assets, and a 60-day extension for permanent nuclear talks — terms that would reshape global energy flows overnight.
- The proposal immediately fractured and then reassembled Republican support in Washington, with Senator Lindsey Graham reversing his criticism of the Iran deal the moment Saudi normalization entered the picture, illustrating how the Saudi angle functions as political cover.
- The fundamental tension remains unresolved — normalizing with Israel while simultaneously negotiating with Iran requires adversaries to move in opposite directions at the same moment, and no formal commitments from Gulf states have yet been made public.
- Trump's Sunday messaging was less a diplomatic announcement than a pressure campaign, designed to make each party feel the gravitational pull of a historic moment already in motion — a bet that momentum itself can substitute for settled agreement.
Donald Trump spent Sunday on the phone with the leaders of seven Gulf nations and Pakistan's military chief before posting a message on Truth Social that tied together two of the most ambitious projects of his second term: a nuclear agreement with Iran and the expansion of the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia. The calls spanned crown princes, kings, presidents, and the Pakistani general serving as the main intermediary with Tehran. He also spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, describing the conversation as highly productive.
The real substance lay in what Trump asked of his Gulf allies: once an Iran deal was finalized, he wanted them to normalize relations with Israel and join the Abraham Accords. He even floated, without elaboration, the possibility that Iran itself might one day participate — a notion that would have seemed fantastical only months earlier.
Details leaked to news outlets sketched the emerging agreement's shape: the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, partial sanctions relief, billions in unfrozen Iranian assets, and a sixty-day extension for permanent nuclear negotiations. Trump confirmed the final details were still being worked out but presented the overall framework as essentially settled. The Strait alone carries roughly a fifth of the world's oil trade.
Saudi Arabia's entry into the Abraham Accords would mark a historic realignment. The Biden administration had pursued the same goal for years, only to see talks collapse after October 7, 2023. Trump was now attempting to revive that vision by bundling it with the Iran negotiations — telling Gulf states that peace with Tehran made peace with Israel not just possible but strategically necessary.
The proposal immediately scrambled Washington's politics. Senator Lindsey Graham had criticized the Iran deal terms the day before, but reversed course entirely the moment Saudi normalization entered the picture, calling it potentially one of the most consequential agreements in Middle Eastern history. Trump dismissed Republican critics as losers, suggesting he viewed the Saudi dimension as politically unassailable within his own party.
What remained unresolved was whether the pieces would actually hold together. No formal signing date had been announced, no Gulf state had publicly committed, and the core tension — that normalizing with Israel while negotiating with Iran required adversaries to move simultaneously in opposite directions — had not been bridged. Trump's Sunday campaign was designed to manufacture momentum, to make each party feel part of something larger than any single bilateral deal. Whether that momentum would prove sufficient remained an open question.
Donald Trump spent Sunday morning on the phone with the leaders of seven Gulf nations and Pakistan's military chief, and by afternoon he had posted a message on Truth Social that tied together two of the most ambitious diplomatic projects of his second term: a nuclear agreement with Iran and the expansion of the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia.
The calls themselves were significant—Trump spoke with the crown princes and kings of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain, along with the presidents of Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan, and Pakistani General Asim Munir, who has been serving as the main intermediary with Tehran. He also called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a conversation he described as highly productive. But the real news came in what Trump asked of his Gulf allies: once the Iran deal was finalized, he wanted them to join the Abraham Accords and normalize relations with Israel. He even suggested, without elaboration, that Iran itself might eventually participate in the framework—a possibility that would have seemed impossible just months earlier.
The timing was deliberate. According to details that had leaked to news outlets, the emerging agreement with Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which has been blocked since the war began, provide partial relief from economic sanctions, unlock billions in frozen Iranian assets, and extend negotiations over a permanent nuclear deal by sixty days. Trump confirmed on Truth Social that these final details were still being worked out, but he presented the overall shape as essentially settled. The Strait of Hormuz alone carries roughly a fifth of the world's oil trade, and Trump's team considered its reopening already agreed upon.
Saudi Arabia's entry into the Abraham Accords would represent a historic shift in Middle Eastern alignments. The Biden administration had spent years pursuing exactly this outcome, negotiating a draft agreement that included security guarantees for Riyadh and cooperation on civilian nuclear energy. Those talks had stalled after Hamas's attack on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent Israeli military campaign in Gaza. Now Trump was attempting to revive and expand that vision by bundling it with the Iran negotiations—essentially telling the Gulf states that peace with Tehran made peace with Israel not just possible but strategically necessary.
The proposal immediately scrambled the politics in Washington. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, one of Trump's closest Republican allies, had criticized the Iran deal terms just the day before, warning that they could become a nightmare for Israel. But the moment he learned that Saudi-Israeli normalization was on the table, he reversed course entirely, calling the potential agreement one of the most consequential in Middle Eastern history. Trump, meanwhile, dismissed his Republican critics as "losers" in another Truth Social post, a characteristic move that suggested he saw the diplomatic package as politically unassailable within his own party once the Saudi angle became clear.
What remained uncertain was whether the pieces would actually fit together. The Iran negotiations were described as in their final stretch but not yet closed. Trump had not announced a formal signing date. The Gulf states had not publicly committed to anything. And the fundamental tension—that normalizing with Israel while negotiating with Iran required both sides to move simultaneously in opposite directions—had not been resolved. But Trump's Sunday messaging campaign was clearly designed to create momentum, to make the various parties feel that they were part of something larger and more significant than any single bilateral agreement. Whether that momentum would be enough to carry the deal across the finish line remained to be seen.
Citas Notables
Trump dismissed Republican critics as 'losers' in response to their concerns about the Iran deal terms— Trump, via Truth Social
Graham called the potential agreement 'one of the most consequential in Middle Eastern history' after learning of Saudi normalization plans— Senator Lindsey Graham
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why tie the Iran deal and the Saudi normalization together? Couldn't Trump have pursued them separately?
Because they're actually the same negotiation wearing different masks. If Iran is coming back into the international system, the Gulf states need reassurance that Israel isn't being left vulnerable. And if Saudi Arabia normalizes with Israel, it signals to Iran that the region is moving on without it—which gives Iran incentive to make a deal rather than be isolated.
So this is leverage disguised as vision.
It's both. Trump genuinely wants to reshape the region's architecture. But yes, he's also using one prize to make the other more achievable. He's telling Saudi Arabia: help me close the Iran deal, and I'll give you the normalization you've wanted for years.
Graham's reversal is striking. He went from critic to cheerleader in twenty-four hours.
Because the Saudi piece changes the entire political calculus. An Iran deal alone looks like appeasement to Republicans. An Iran deal that unlocks Saudi-Israeli peace looks like a strategic masterstroke. Trump understood that immediately.
What happens if Iran doesn't actually agree to the terms?
Then the whole structure collapses. The Gulf states won't normalize with Israel just because Trump asked them to. They need to believe the Iran threat has been neutralized. If those negotiations fail, you're back to square one.
And the Strait of Hormuz—that's the real prize, isn't it?
It's certainly the most concrete one. Twenty percent of global oil trade flows through there. Reopening it would reshape energy markets and geopolitics simultaneously. Everything else is political theater compared to that.