As Donald Trump's team prepares for the billionaire tycoon to take the most high-powered and high-pressured job in the world, attention is focused on his relationship with Russia, his attitudes to trade and the selections he's made for his cabinet.
Yet it's possible that the biggest impact the Trump presidency will have is on foreign policy. Trump may be as unpredictable in foreign affairs (and as commander-in-chief) as he was during his campaign.
The eyes of the world are on Washington, DC, as Trump prepares to be sworn into office, but the direction his policy takes will be decided as much in the Middle East as in the Pentagon, the White House or the State Department.
Although some of the focus will rightly be on how to tackle the threat of ISIS and the ongoing carnage in Syria and Iraq, as well as the American-backed Saudi war on Yemen, there will be much attention on what the Trump administration will do about the longest-running conflict in the Middle East – between Israel and the Palestinians.
In 2017, exactly 100 years on from the Balfour Declaration which helped to create the state of Israel and 50 years on from the Six Day War and the beginning of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, there is little sign of a lasting agreement between the two sides. So what do we know about Trump's position on the conflict and what might he decide to do now?
As with all Trump policies, it's hard to know. Because he isn't a career politician, there is no voting record, fundraising paper trail or much other indication of his concrete position. He has, though, made a number of pronouncements and appointments which give us some clues.
Trump's pick for US Ambassador to Israel gives us one of our main hints on how the administration will position itself. David Freidman, a lawyer who has a long relationship with Trump, is an Orthodox Jew who is known to take a hardline pro-Israel stance on the issues. He has links to organisations which promote Jewish settlements in the West Bank, which is considered illegal by the international community. He has also opposed a two state solution, and even suggested Israel should annexe the entire West Bank. In addition, Mr Freidman has repeatedly angered more liberal Jewish groups, such as J-Street which support a two state solution. He was described in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz as "an extreme right-winger".
Appointing such an unflinching conservative to the position of Ambassador is an indication of Trump's possible policy positions. Real changes in policy, though, will come in Congress and the White House.
That is what makes Mr Trump's recent comments so interesting. In one of his most controversial pronouncements, he has said that he will move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – a very controversial move. Most international embassies are based in Tel Aviv because the international community wants to wait for the outcome of a final peace agreement on the status of Jerusalem. The Palestinian people see the east of Jerusalem as a potential future capital for their state, while Israel declared in 1980 that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel".
Trump is not alone in pledging to move the embassy to Jerusalem – Bill Clinton and George W Bush did the same, although neither acted upon their promise. With an ambassador who supports the move and moves in Congress to make it happen, it seems the Trump White House may complete the deal. However, the Jerusalem Post reports a new "violent uprising" may result from the move.
Another issue is the settlements. Over half a million Israelis now live in settlements in East Jerusalem as well as what some call Judea and Samaria, otherwise known as the West Bank. This is the main portion of land which is anticipated to form a Palestinian state. For this reason, the settlements are considered illegal under international law.
Last month's UN Security Council Resolution which condemned Israeli settlement construction was historic because the Obama Administration abstained (while the other 14 countries voted for the motion). Trump immediately tweeted his disapproval, saying, "As to the UN, things will be different after Jan 20<sup>th." This implies that both via the UN and in terms of direct diplomatic pressure, Trump is unlikely to campaign for the settlement building programme to cease.
This begs probably the biggest question of all. Does the Trump administration really believe in a two state solution at all? It's tough to answer. Early on in his campaign, Trump appeared to question how willing Israel was to make peace. Since his election, Reince Priebus, Trump's Chief-of-Staff has claimed that Trump's pick for ambassador doesn't mean he's abandoning a two state solution. However, there is every indication that his policy positions will heavily favour Israel. If the Palestinians don't have faith in the process, then any two state deal is unlikely, even if Trump pays lip service to it.
Trump's announcements so far seem designed to appeal to the right wing in both Israel and back at home. How far he acts upon these sentiments remains to be seen. As with so many other areas of his presidency, we are in uncharted territory. The world watches and waits.
