Trump’s Trip to the Gulf

Trump’s Trip to the Gulf

U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman attend a bilateral meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman attend a bilateral meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. Brian Snyder/Reuters

Last updated May 13, 2025 10:20 am (EST)

U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman attend a bilateral meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman attend a bilateral meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025. Brian Snyder/Reuters
Article
Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.

Welcome to the Daily News Brief, CFR’s flagship morning newsletter summarizing the top global news and analysis of the day. 

Subscribe to the Daily News Brief to receive it every weekday morning.

Top of the Agenda

More on:

Daily News Brief

Trump begins the first state visit of his second term in Saudi Arabia today before traveling on to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Investment deals are due to be at the forefront of the trip. Leaders are also expected to discuss ongoing nuclear talks with Iran, Syria’s reconstruction, and the Israel-Hamas war. Trump’s trip comes a day after Hamas released Israeli American hostage Edan Alexander, a move which Trump called a goodwill gesture to negotiators trying to end the war.

Trump’s Gulf agenda.

  • Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is expected to give more details about a January pledge of $600 billion in trade and investment with the United States over the next four years.
  • Trump said ahead of the trip that he plans to accept a luxury plane from Qatar to serve as Air Force One, which he described as a “gift” and Qatar described as a transfer for “temporary use.” The prospect has drawn scrutiny for potential ethics violations, including of the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
  • Trump said yesterday he might fly over to Istanbul for potential talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Thursday.
  • Leaders from the region are expected to encourage Trump to lift sanctions on Syria, which he said yesterday he was considering

Hamas’s hostage release.

  • Hamas said after releasing Edan Alexander that it was ready to enter into immediate talks on ending the war and releasing further hostages. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered a delegation to travel to Doha for talks.
  • The U.S. talks with Hamas about Alexander bypassed Israeli officials. U.S. hostage envoy Adam Boehler and U.S. envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff told the families of remaining hostages that they were committed to bringing back all fifty-eight of those still in Gaza, a forum for hostage families said.

“It seems that the Trump administration sees America’s partners in the Gulf as their trusted interlocutors, not treaty allies in Europe or other partners. And it’s a different look for American foreign policy to go to these Gulf states as mediators on issues, both within the region and beyond.”

CFR expert Steven A. Cook at a Media Briefing

More on:

Daily News Brief

Across the Globe

Ruling on downed Malaysian plane. Russia is responsible for shooting down a Malaysia Airlines passenger plane over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people, the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) ruled. The plane came under fire during combat between pro-Russian separatists and Ukraine’s armed forces. Australia and the Netherlands—whose citizens were on the flight—want Russia to enter talks on reparations, the Dutch foreign minister said. Moscow does not recognize the ICAO’s authority and has called the allegations “fake.”

Colombia’s BRI ambitions. Colombia plans to join China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), President Gustavo Petro said yesterday during a visit to the country. More than twelve Latin American countries have joined, but Colombia had until now held out; it has been one of the biggest recipients of U.S. aid in the region. Now, Bogotá seeks to “expand our options to other parts of the world,” its foreign minister said. 

The climate adaptation economy. Companies that respond to the physical risks associated with climate change made more than $1 trillion in combined revenue last year, the London Stock Exchange Group said in a study. Its sustainable investment research director said that the green economy “is now so big… it’s not going to implode just like that,” regardless of potential policy choices by national governments.  

U.S.-China trade climbdown. Following yesterday’s announcement of broad bilateral tariff relief, Trump also ordered the reduction of tariffs on low-value parcels shipped from China. Those duties had targeted Chinese e-commerce companies. Meanwhile, China removed a ban on airlines accepting deliveries of Boeing planes, unnamed sources told Bloomberg. Boeing and China’s aviation authority did not immediately comment.

India-Pakistan talks. Top military officials from both countries spoke yesterday and agreed to continue talks on shoring up Saturday’s ceasefire. Both sides agreed to gradually reduce troop deployments from their border areas. Pakistan said its airspace was open yesterday, while India said civilian flights at more than thirty airports in the country’s north were also functioning.

Rama’s victory in Albania. Albanian leftist Prime Minister Edi Rama is on track for a fourth term, according to the preliminary results of Sunday’s election. Rama campaigned on moving forward with reforms that would bring Albania closer to European Union membership. His party was estimated to have won eighty-two legislative seats, well above the majority needed to govern alone.

Afrikaners arrive in U.S. as refugees. Fifty-nine white South Africans arrived in the United States under a new U.S. policy that grants them refugee status. Trump falsely said they were victims of “genocide,” while South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said they “did not fit the definition of a refugee.” Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International, called the policy “a racialized immigration program masquerading as refugee resettlement.” The Trump administration has suspended other refugee resettlements. 

Uranium harvesting. A team of Chinese scientists developed an electrochemical method to extract 100 percent of the uranium from seawater, they wrote in a paper in Nature Sustainability. Some existing physical methods of extraction absorb less than 10 percent of the uranium found in water. A chemical expert at the University of North Texas told New Scientist that the method is “a significant step forward,” although there was “a long way to go” before its large-scale use

What’s Next

  • Today, a U.S. federal court in New York will hear a case on the legality of Trump’s tariffs.
  • Today, the Cannes Film Festival begins.
  • Tomorrow, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese makes his first overseas trip to Indonesia.
Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Ukraine

Ukraine said it had used 117 drones to target airfields deep in Russian territory. The daring attack demonstrated low-cost precision strikes accessible to almost any state or militant group.

China Strategy Initiative

At the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that the United States would be expanding its defense partnership with India. His statement was in line with U.S. policy over the last two decades, which, irrespective of the party in power, has sought to cultivate India as a serious defense partner. The U.S.-India defense partnership has come a long way. Beginning in 2001, the United States and India moved from little defense cooperation or coordination to significant gestures that would lay the foundation of the robust defense partnership that exists today—such as India offering access to its facilities after 9/11 to help the United States launch operations in Afghanistan or the 123 Agreement in 2005 that paved the way for civil nuclear cooperation between the two countries. In the United States, there is bipartisan agreement that a strong defense partnership with India is vital for its Indo-Pacific strategy and containing China. In India, too, there is broad political support for its strategic partnership with the United States given its immense wariness about its fractious border relationship with China. Consequently, the U.S.-India bilateral relationship has heavily emphasized security, with even trade tilting toward defense goods. Despite the massive changes to the relationship in the last few years, and both countries’ desire to develop ever-closer defense ties, differences between the United States and India remain. A significant part of this has to do with the differing norms that underpin the defense interests of each country. The following Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) memos by defense experts in three countries are part of a larger CFR project assessing India’s approach to the international order in different areas, and illustrate India’s positions on important defense issues—military operationalization, cooperation in space, and export controls—and how they differ with respect to the United States and its allies. Sameer Lalwani (Washington, DC) argues that the two countries differ in their thinking about deterrence, and that this is evident in three categories crucial to defense: capability, geography, and interoperability. When it comes to increasing material capabilities, for example, India prioritizes domestic economic development, including developing indigenous capabilities (i.e., its domestic defense-industrial sector). With regard to geography, for example, the United States and its Western allies think of crises, such as Ukraine, in terms of global domino effects; India, in contrast, thinks regionally, and confines itself to the effects on its neighborhood and borders (and, as the recent crisis with Pakistan shows, India continues to face threats on its border, widening the geographic divergence with the United States). And India’s commitment to strategic autonomy means the two countries remain far apart on the kind of interoperability required by modern military operations. Yet there is also reason for optimism about the relationship as those differences are largely surmountable. Dimitrios Stroikos (London) argues that India’s space policy has shifted from prioritizing socioeconomic development to pursuing both national security and prestige. While it is party to all five UN space treaties that govern outer space and converges with the United States on many issues in the civil, commercial, and military domains of space, India is careful with regard to some norms. It favors, for example, bilateral initiatives over multilateral, and the inclusion of Global South countries in institutions that it believes to be dominated by the West. Konark Bhandari (New Delhi) argues that India’s stance on export controls is evolving. It has signed three of the four major international export control regimes, but it has to consistently contend with the cost of complying, particularly as the United States is increasingly and unilaterally imposing export control measures both inside and outside of those regimes. When it comes to export controls, India prefers trade agreements with select nations, prizes its strategic autonomy (which includes relations with Russia and China through institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS), and prioritizes its domestic development. Furthermore, given President Donald Trump’s focus on bilateral trade, the two countries’ differences will need to be worked out if future tech cooperation is to be realized.

United States

The Court of International Trade’s ruling on Donald Trump’s tariffs is the most consequential potential setback for the president’s trade agenda to date. CFR experts weigh in.