From Political Islam to Investment Islam: The Strategic Reconfiguration of the Middle East in Contemporary U.S. Policy

Since President Donald Trump’s official visit to Riyadh in 2017, U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East has undergone a profound transformation. This shift marked a clear departure from the Obama administration’s approach, which emphasized dialogue with “moderate” Islamist actors in the wake of the Arab Spring. Instead, the Trump doctrine favored a partnership with traditional Gulf monarchies, prioritizing economic growth and authoritarian stability over political reform and ideological pluralism.

This article seeks to examine the implications of this paradigmatic shift, exploring the emergence of what may be termed “investment Islam” as a replacement for “political Islam”. It analyzes the resulting transformations in regional power dynamics, evaluates the reliability of emerging narratives, and offers a critical perspective on the new U.S.-led framework for Middle Eastern order.

1. From Obama’s “Moderate Islam” to Trump’s “Profit-Driven Islam”

The Obama administration’s Middle East policy, notably articulated in his 2009 speeches in Cairo and Ankara, aimed to re-engage the Muslim world through mutual respect and support for reform-oriented Islamist movements. Turkey was promoted as a model that could harmonize democratic institutions with Islamic cultural identity.

By contrast, Trump’s approach was explicitly transactional. It was built on alliances with resilient autocracies—chiefly Saudi Arabia—and excluded actors associated with political Islam or revolutionary ideology. The underlying logic emphasized stability before politics, and investment before reform.

2. Saudi Arabia as a Strategic Anchor

Under the Trump and post-Trump era, Saudi Arabia emerged as a pivotal actor in the U.S. strategy for Middle East stabilization. The Kingdom was repositioned not only as a security partner, but also as a financial engine driving regional and global growth. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030 provided the ideological and institutional framework for this transformation, promoting economic diversification, technological innovation, and the modernization of national identity.

Riyadh’s role in major geo-economic projects such as the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) has consolidated its importance in counterbalancing China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Simultaneously, its undeclared yet progressing normalization with Israel situates it at the center of a new security architecture where U.S. interests, Gulf investments, and Israeli defense priorities converge.

3. Regional Role Reassignments and Strategic Declines

a. Turkey and Qatar: From Ideological Leaders to Conditional Partners

Turkey, once heralded as the standard-bearer of democratic Islamism, has seen its regional influence wane. Its current role is limited to that of a pragmatic economic and security partner, operating under the emerging Saudi-American umbrella.

Qatar, long active in supporting political Islam and conflict mediation, faces reduced maneuverability. Its future role depends on whether it can shift from ideological patronage to developmental diplomacy, while maintaining strategic access to Washington, Tel Aviv, and Tehran. Failure to adapt may demote Doha to a secondary player in a Saudi-led regional order.

b. The Palestinian Question: From Resistance to Technical Management

As regional normalization with Israel advances and the two-state solution fades, Palestinian political dynamics are increasingly steered toward technocratic governance, supported by Saudi and Egyptian funds. The strategic aim is to maintain a low-intensity conflict without resolving final status issues.

Hamas, in this context, is confronted with a stark choice: disarm and integrate into a unity government, or face internal fragmentation. The traditional resistance narrative is giving way to a realist logic of survival, although the potential for renewed radicalization remains if material conditions fail to improve.

4. Conclusion: Between Promises of Growth and the Risk of Backlash

The U.S. attempt to reengineer the Middle East through an economy-first, ideology-neutral, security-stabilizing strategy has generated short-term alignment among several key actors. However, the long-term sustainability of this framework depends on its ability to deliver inclusive economic benefits, mitigate socio-political grievances, and manage tensions without reigniting the cycle of rebellion.

Should these ambitions falter, the region could witness the resurgence of political Islam in new forms, or a return of insurgent narratives amid economic stagnation and social frustration. The burial of political Islam does not necessarily entail the death of political contestation.

---

By Belgacem Merbah

---

References:

• Fawaz Gerges, Obama and the Middle East: The End of America’s Moment?, Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
• Madawi Al-Rasheed, The Son King: Reform and Repression in Saudi Arabia, Oxford University Press, 2020.
• Marc Lynch, The New Arab Wars: Uprisings and Anarchy in the Middle East, PublicAffairs, 2016.
• F. Gregory Gause III, The International Relations of the Persian Gulf, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
• Bruce Riedel, Kings and Presidents: Saudi Arabia and the United States since FDR, Brookings Institution Press, 2017.