A High-Stakes Diplomatic Gambit: Unraveling the Proposed Erdogan-Sisi-Netanyahu-Trump Summit

In a diplomatic maneuver that promised to either redefine or further entrench the complexities of Middle Eastern politics, a highly anticipated summit was once on the table, proposed by then-US President Donald Trump. The grand vision? To bring together an unprecedented constellation of regional leaders in Washington D.C.: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The primary objective was to breathe life into Trump's much-touted "deal of the century" – a peace plan aimed at resolving the perennial Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

This proposed gathering was not merely a routine diplomatic meeting; it was a high-wire act over a chasm of deeply entrenched geopolitical rivalries and personal animosities.

The very notion of Erdogan and Sisi sharing a room, let alone a negotiating table, sent ripples of astonishment across the international stage. Their relationship, marred by years of bitter ideological clashes and diplomatic freeze, represented one of the most significant hurdles to any unified regional front.

President Erdogan, while acknowledging the potential for such a summit, articulated clear, non-negotiable conditions for his attendance.

Central among these was the absolute necessity of President Sisi's presence. "I told Mr. Trump that if Mr. Sisi attends such a meeting, I would also attend," Erdogan stated, signaling a conditional willingness to bridge the deep chasm that had separated Ankara and Cairo since Sisi's ascent to power in 2013.

Beyond protocol, Erdogan emphasized that any peace initiative must unequivocally address the "legitimate demands" of the Palestinian people, grounding Turkey’s involvement in its long-standing support for Palestinian rights.

The animosity between Erdogan and Sisi runs deep, rooted in fundamental disagreements over governance and ideology.

Erdogan has consistently refused to recognize Sisi as Egypt's legitimate leader, viewing his rise as an illegitimate coup against democratically elected President Mohammed Morsi, a key ally of Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood. This ideological chasm led to the expulsion of ambassadors and a complete severing of high-level dialogue, creating a diplomatic vacuum that has persisted for years.

Efforts by other nations, including Saudi Arabia, to mediate a reconciliation between the two leaders had repeatedly faltered, underscoring the profound nature of their ideological divide.

Despite these formidable obstacles, the prospect of a four-way summit with Trump at the helm ignited cautious hope.

Trump himself had previously attempted to broker a meeting between Erdogan and Sisi, highlighting his personal investment in leveraging his unique diplomatic style to achieve breakthroughs. The "deal of the century" was seen as a cornerstone of his Middle East policy, and a summit uniting these pivotal regional actors would have been a monumental achievement, potentially signaling a new era of dialogue, however fragile.

The implications of such a meeting, regardless of its ultimate outcome, would have been profound.

A successful summit could have reshaped alliances, offered a new trajectory for peace, and provided a platform for addressing broader regional security concerns. Conversely, its failure would have merely underscored the enduring, seemingly intractable nature of Middle Eastern conflicts and the complexities of inter-state relations in a volatile region.

As the world watched, the delicate dance of diplomacy continued, with high hopes tempered by the stark reality of historical grievances and deeply entrenched political positions.