How do Christian leaders in the Middle East view Donald Trump's foreign policy?

1. A base of enthusiastic Christian Zionist support

Evangelical Christian Zionists — influential both inside the U.S. policy ecosystem and among some regional interlocutors — have been a steady source of enthusiasm for Trump’s Middle East agenda, celebrating moves perceived as restoring Christian and Western claims to the biblical landscape and welcoming appointments seen as ideological matches, such as nominees tied to the evangelical right ^{[1] [3]}.

2. Mixed responses among Levantine Christian leaders

Levantine Christian leaders and communities, notably in Lebanon, register a spectrum from trepidation to cautious optimism: some appreciate any American policy that appears to restrain regional adversaries or open business and security channels, while others fear being sidelined politically if U.S. policy further privileges Israeli objectives over Palestinian rights ^{[2] [5] [3]}.

3. Security-first appeal: promises to protect persecuted Christians

Trump’s rhetoric and actions framing U.S. force as a protector of Christians abroad — exemplified by strikes asserted to target Islamist militants accused of attacking Christian communities — resonate with Christian leaders who prioritize immediate physical security and expect Washington to intervene on their behalf ^{[6] [7]}.

4. Worries about Palestinian marginalization and humanitarian consequences

Many Christian figures who live alongside Palestinian populations or minister to refugees see Trump’s reductions in Palestinian aid, shifts in UN and donor posture, and hardline Israeli alignment as likely to worsen humanitarian conditions and marginalize Palestinian Christians politically; analysts warn these policies could deepen sectarian fault lines and make Christian communities collateral victims of policies that lack protections for civilians ^{[3] [4]}.

5. Concern over delegitimising Islamist actors and democratic space

Some Christian leaders who favor pluralistic civic life caution that moves to brand Islamist movements — for example efforts to designate parts of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist — risk eroding democratic space across the region and could turbocharge repression that harms interreligious coexistence, a development with indirect but real consequences for Christian minorities ^[8].

6. Transactional diplomacy: elite gains, grassroots unease

Trump’s transactional style — arms sales, discreet elite diplomacy, and business‑first engagements with Gulf capitals — earns praise from Christian elites who value regime stability and patronage, yet it fuels grassroots unease among Christians who worry that deals with autocratic rulers and unconditional support for Israel will sacrifice long‑term communal protections for short‑term security guarantees ^{[9] [10]}.

7. A divided calculus shaped by survival, influence and theology

Ultimately Christian leaders’ views track three overlapping calculations: immediate security and survival, political influence within national and regional orders, and theological or ideological affinities (notably Christian Zionism) that map closely onto parts of Trump’s agenda; where those align, support is strong, and where they clash, criticism and fear take hold ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

Conclusion and reporting limits

Reporting indicates a clear split but provides limited systematic polling of Middle Eastern Christian clergy themselves; much of the evidence comes from policy analyses, regional reactions, and reporting on appointments and strikes rather than a wide sample of clerical statements, so conclusions must be read as indicative rather than exhaustive ^{[1] [2] [6]}.