Let’s dive into the pros and cons of Trump selecting Steve Witkoff as a special envoy to the Middle East.

Pros of Steve Witkoff as Special Envoy

1. Business Acumen and Deal-Making: Witkoff is a successful real estate developer with a track record of negotiating complex deals. Trump, also a businessman, likely sees Witkoff’s negotiation skills as a valuable asset in the complex geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. A businessman’s perspective can sometimes cut through the political red tape, focusing on practical solutions rather than endless bureaucratic debates.
2. Fresh Perspective: Witkoff is not a career politician or a State Department insider, which could be beneficial. Often, Middle Eastern negotiations are bogged down by entrenched political interests and old strategies that don’t work. Having someone from outside the usual foreign policy circle could offer fresh ideas and approaches.
3. Strong Pro-Israel Stance: Witkoff has historically been supportive of Israel. His appointment might strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship and continue the policies Trump implemented, such as moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.
4. Alignment with Trump’s Priorities: Trump’s Middle East strategy was heavily focused on economic development and leveraging business relationships, as seen in the Abraham Accords. Witkoff’s business background could complement this approach, aiming to foster economic partnerships rather than relying solely on traditional diplomatic channels.

Cons of Steve Witkoff as Special Envoy

1. Lack of Diplomatic Experience: Witkoff’s primary experience lies in real estate, not international diplomacy. Negotiating property deals is quite different from brokering peace agreements or handling sensitive political matters in a volatile region like the Middle East. This lack of experience could undermine U.S. credibility and effectiveness.
2. Potential Conflict of Interest: As a wealthy businessman, there are concerns about conflicts of interest, especially if he has investments in regions or industries tied to the Middle East. This could create a perception (or reality) of bias, where personal business interests influence policy decisions.
3. Risk of Overemphasis on Business Deals: While economic development is a vital part of stability, it is not a cure-all for the deeply rooted religious and political conflicts in the Middle East. An overemphasis on economic deals might ignore the complex social, religious, and cultural issues that have fueled conflicts for centuries. This could result in short-term wins but long-term instability.
4. Alienation of Traditional Allies: Career diplomats and experts who have spent years building relationships in the region might feel sidelined by the appointment of an outsider. This could create friction within the U.S. foreign policy establishment, making it harder for Witkoff to succeed.

Conclusion

The selection of Steve Witkoff as a special envoy is be a mixed bag. On one hand, his strong pro-Israel stance aligns with the biblical mandate to support Israel, a nation with deep spiritual significance for Christians. His business expertise may also bring a fresh, results-oriented approach to a region that has seen little progress through traditional diplomacy.

However, the concerns about his lack of diplomatic experience and potential conflicts of interest cannot be ignored. Witkoff might lack the diverse counsel and experience necessary to navigate the complexities of Middle Eastern politics effectively.

In conclusion, if Witkoff can leverage his strengths while relying on the expertise of seasoned diplomats and placing the interests of the nation above personal gain, his appointment could yield positive outcomes. However, if his approach focuses too narrowly on economic deals without considering the deeper spiritual and political nuances, it could fall flat.