Trump seeks wider geopolitical restructuring through Iran ceasefire deal
US President Donald Trump points his finger towards Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as they shake hands during a press conference after meeting at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, US, December 29, 2025. REUTERS
At a time when negotiators are striving to secure a peace agreement between the United States and Iran, President Donald Trump has stirred a fresh controversy by attempting to link any prospective deal to Middle Eastern countries joining the Abraham Accords — the US-backed regional security and normalisation framework.
In a post on Truth Social on Monday, Trump acknowledged that negotiations with Iran are “proceeding nicely”, but claimed that during his Saturday’s conference call with leaders from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain, he pushed for all of them to join the Abraham Accords simultaneously as part of a broader regional settlement linked to Iran.
However, according to Barak Ravid, Axios correspondent and CNN analyst, “The leaders, especially those of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Pakistan who don't have formal diplomatic relations with Israel, were surprised by Trump's request.” Ravid quoted a US official as saying, “There was silence on the line and Trump joked and asked if they are still there.”
🇺🇸🇸🇦President Trump told leaders of Arab and Muslim countries during a Saturday conference call that if a deal to end the Iran war is achieved he wants their nations to join the Abraham Accords and sign peace agreements with Israel. My story on @axioshttps://t.co/2wjbpf0Tej
Trump specifically urged Saudi Arabia and Qatar to sign first and suggested that countries refusing to join should not be included in any broader deal with Iran. Riyadh, however, is unlikely to entertain any such request and change its position.
“Saudi Arabia’s position on the Palestinian issue remains unchanged,” Al Arabiya English reported, quoting a Saudi source. “There needs to be an irreversible pathway to a Palestinian state,” he added.
In the Truth Social post, Trump also claimed that some regional leaders would even welcome Iran into the Abraham Accords framework if a US-Iran agreement is finalised, describing the proposed arrangement as a historic coalition capable of reshaping the Middle East politically, economically, and strategically.
Trump’s post appears to signal an effort to transform the recent Iran ceasefire diplomacy into a far broader geopolitical restructuring project centred on the Abraham Accords and a US-led regional security architecture, according to journalist and columnist Asma Shirazi. By publicly referencing countries such as Pakistan in the context of normalisation discussions, Trump seems intent on projecting the image of a widening Islamic-world consensus behind an American-sponsored regional order in the Middle East.
However, “Pakistan’s position on Israel and the Palestinian issue remains longstanding, principled, and constitutionally rooted,” writes Shirazi in an X post.
Pakistan’ official position regarding ‘Abraham Accords’ is known to everyone and Pakistan is under no obligation to sign Abraham Accords framework just on the pretext of mediating a war forged by USA and Israel on Iran.
President Trump’s latest comments suggest an effort to…Islamabad’s stance is not transactional, nor is it shaped by temporary diplomatic shifts emerging from the recent Iran-US crisis, according to former diplomats. Pakistan has consistently maintained that any recognition of Israel is linked to the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, with Al Quds Al Sharif as its capital.
Read More: Trump links Iran deal to Abraham Accords
In that context, attempts to associate Pakistan with the Abraham Accords framework are being viewed by regional experts as largely narrative-driven rather than reflective of any substantive policy shift. These experts say that Trump’s remarks appear designed to create momentum for a broader strategic realignment in the region by leveraging the diplomatic opening created through the Iran ceasefire process.
Pakistan’s diplomatic relevance has undeniably grown in recent weeks due to its role in de-escalation and mediation efforts during the US-Iran tensions. Both Washington and Tehran acknowledged Islamabad’s constructive engagement, enhancing Pakistan’s international profile as a stabilising interlocutor during a volatile period. Yet Pakistani policymakers maintain that this diplomatic role should not be interpreted as acceptance of unrelated political or strategic arrangements.
The linkage being drawn between regional peace efforts and the Abraham Accords is therefore seen by experts as out of context. Observers argue that the urgent objective of preventing military escalation in the Middle East cannot automatically be expanded into a broader political alignment exercise involving normalisation with Israel.
Trump’s framing of the issue in “all or no deal” terms is also being interpreted as a pressure tactic intended either to push regional states toward wider political alignment or to serve domestic political messaging within the United States, according to experts. From Pakistan’s perspective, however, the resolution of military tensions with Iran and questions related to Arab-Israeli normalisation are separate diplomatic tracks that cannot be artificially merged.
Trump’s own acknowledgement that “one or two” countries may choose not to join such arrangements is being interpreted by experts as an implicit recognition of the political and ideological realities within parts of the Muslim world. For Pakistan, analysts argue, this reinforces the view that the remarks reflect aspiration and strategic signalling rather than any emerging consensus or policy commitment.
Analysts say that Islamabad appears determined to preserve its traditional foreign policy position: supporting regional peace and de-escalation while maintaining that any change in its stance toward Israel must remain tied to a just and internationally recognised settlement of the Palestinian issue.
Former senator Mushahid Hussain Syed said Trump’s request was akin to rewarding Israel for its “genocide” in Gaza. “Asking to join so-called ‘Abraham Accords’ is an unacceptable ‘request’ from President Trump to leaders of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia & Qatar, which is tantamount to rewarding Israel for Gaza genocide and unwarranted aggression against Iran/Qatar/Lebanon,” Mushahid wrote in an X post.
More importantly, Trump’s request seeks to sideline the core cause of conflict in the Middle East, namely, establishing a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
“Obviously, Netanyahu & Co, via powerful Israeli lobby in the US, sneaked in this rather ridiculous proposal which is completely rejected by peoples of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia & Qatar and majority of Muslim world,” he stated.
Asking to join so-called ‘Abraham Accords’ is an unacceptable ‘request’ from President @realDonaldTrump to leaders of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia & Qatar, tantamount to rewarding Israel for #GazaGenocide & unwarranted aggression against Iran/Qatar/Lebanon + more importantly,… https://t.co/4fhUu0Sbky
South Asia expert Michael Kugelman said Islamabad had always linked recognition of Israel to the establishment of a Palestinian state, adding that it was an "ironclad position".
Thus, he said that joining the Abraham Accords was a "nonstarter" for Pakistan currently.
"Could that posture change, in the continued absence of a Palestinian state? Perhaps, if the Saudis were to join the AAs, Pakistan would feel pressure to reconsider. But given where public sentiment stands, a Pakistani govt that joins them would risk committing political suicide."
Could that posture change, in the continued absence of a Palestinian state? Perhaps, if the Saudis were to join the AAs, Pakistan would feel pressure to reconsider. But given where public sentiment stands, a Pakistani govt that joins them would risk committing political suicide.