It will require some risky foreign policy moves that might not align with his campaign’s domestic focus — but down this path may lie a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump.

“Trump wants to ‘win,’” said Robert Hamilton, Head of Eurasia Research at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. “It could range from prevailing in a war with Iran to brokering a wide-ranging regional peace deal.”

It would also be a fundamental shift from the Biden administration’s approach, which often appeared indecisive and risk-averse, and focused more on de-escalation than solutions. In many Arab countries, where weakness is disdained, there is openness to a paradigm shift.

Such a shift would involve risking escalation with Iran, where the threat of force may be needed. It would also require offering not only the expected support but tough love to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose supporters are jubilantly expecting a free hand on all fronts.

Trump’s foreign policy cabinet choices up to now are certainly in line with the former. Senator Marco Rubio (headed to State), Mike Waltz (National Security Advisor), and Pete Hegseth (Defense) are all different types of appointments — Rubio stands out as a widely perceived pragmatist — but all are Iran hawks.

If Trump succeeds in any of this — plus in ending the Ukraine war on terms not considered a capitulation to Vladimir Putin — it would be a legacy-building validation for a new-old president who has generally not enjoyed much credit around the world.

This is a roadmap the next administration could take to make the Middle East great again.

“This regime can no longer be appeased,” Rubio said recently of Iran’s mullahs — and turning that into policy would be a huge step in the right direction.

It could come down to something simple: Iran must abandon its proxy militias and nuclear program or face consequences. An ultimatum would be a clear break from the “re-engagement” approach of Biden, who, like his predecessors, allowed the regime to spread chaos through proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Shiite militias in Iraq.

Hezbollah is now badly battered by Israel but Iran is still at it: dispatching Shiite militias and Houthi fighters from Yemen to the failed state of Syria, from which to assist Hezbollah, threaten neighboring Israel, and potentially destabilize US ally Jordan.

An ultimatum would risk war, but allowing the mullahs to stay in power as a nuclear-threshold state may be the bigger risk. An attack on Iran could spark a revolt against the hated regime, which presides over 30% inflation and a three-month fall of 25% in the value of the rial, in part due to its unpopular funding of foreign wars. It could collapse, which would be a favor to the world.

Dr. Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born Israeli Middle East analyst, agreed that “the Iranians fear another uprising and feel weaker than in the past” but cautioned that “they will be more amenable to a negotiation with Trump” than capitulation.

While Qatar hosts America’s Al Udeid Air Base, it has also been a haven for Hamas, allowing the group to operate on its soil and channel funds into Gaza.

Dr. Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born Israeli Middle East analyst, agreed that “the Iranians fear another uprising and feel weaker than in the past” but cautioned that “they will be more amenable to a negotiation with Trump” than capitulation.

Hamas leaders currently based in Qatar include Khaled Mashal, the group’s envoy abroad, and Khalil al-Hayya, a senior adviser. There are reports that Qatar is close to agreeing to expelling them — a great start.

Ending Qatar’s double game would be appreciated by the Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, whose collaboration will be needed for the rest of the plan. Trump’s team should also consider a global hunt for jihadi funding networks, a complex web of skullduggery across Europe and the U.S. that has enabled Hamas to function.

For Qatar, the days of quietly funding militant activities while claiming US alliance may soon be over.

Hezbollah receives an estimated $700 million a year from Iran and, until recently, controlled perhaps a quarter of Lebanon and used the country’s south as a launching pad against Israel. The group has bombarded the north for about a year, since the day after Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre, even before Israel sent a single soldier into Gaza.

Now that Israel has thrashed Hezbollah, a deal may be reached even before Trump’s inauguration on the Lebanese military reclaiming the south — perhaps with help from the Arab League or even an international force.

Either way, the clear message should be: Allowing Hezbollah to operate is no longer acceptable.

Jonathan ElKhoury, a Lebanese-born and Israel-based geopolitics analyst, assesses that Lebanon is ready for a change.