On 6 February, the Israeli parliament passed a controversial measure that retroactively gives approval to illegal Israeli settlements built on the occupied West Bank. This ‘Regularisation Bill’ has severe implications for the long sought after two-state solution as well as Israel’s international relationships.

Yet, amidst the international condemnations, the Trump administration has been silent. The administration had previously stated that settlement expansions “may not be helpful” in securing peace, but at the same time, the Trump presidency has been busy styling itself as the exact opposite of Obama’s presidency which was vocal in its criticisms of Israel. In December, while still President-elect, Trump was already speaking out against a UN resolution condemning settlement construction, the resolution which President Obama decided to abstain from voting which allowed the resolution to be adopted by the UN security council. Following the defeat, Israel declared it would still expand its settlements.

At yesterday’s joint press conference with President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, the two leaders certainly exhibited a more united front than seen with President Obama. Trump began with reaffirming the “unbreakable bond” between the U.S. and Israel. Netanyahu added that the two working together will “dramatically upgrade our alliance in every field.” While they were repeatedly asked about the settlements and the two-state solution, neither gave any actual answer. The most that Trump would say on the settlements was when he turned and said to Netanyahu, “I’d like to see you hold back on settlements for a little bit?”. He continued with saying that he would like to see a deal be made, to which Netanyahu replied: “let’s try.” Even Trump had to point out that the Israeli Prime Minister’s response was “not too optimistic.”

When asked to further elaborate on the settlements or his opinion on talk in Israel of annexing the West Bank, Trump simply did not give an answer. Netanyahu, the clearly more experienced politician, evaded questions on the two-state solution and settlements by going back to his two prerequisites for peace: the recognition of the Jewish state and Israel’s security control of everything west of the Jordan River. He also made sure to place the blame firmly on Palestine for the inability to reach any prior peace agreement, asserting that “the source of the conflict [is] the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognise the Jewish state”.  Both leaders alluded to a new way towards a peace agreement, Netanyahu mentioning working with Arab nations in seeking a regional approach to peace.

Trump and Netanyahu, apparently having agreed on mutual enemies, repeatedly brought the spotlight back to radical Islam and the Iranian threat. Trump attacked the Iran nuclear deal as “one of the worst deals I’ve ever seen”, while Netanyahu stated that Iran is seeking a nuclear arsenal and “the ability to launch them everywhere on Earth, including, and especially, the United States”. He also made a point of mentioning Arab states having concerns over the threat Iran poses. This is likely the platform from which the Israeli Prime Minister will begin seeking his proposed regional peace agreement. If enough Arab nations do acquiesce to such a regional peace agreement with Israel, it is likely that the compromises Trump called for from both sides will land primarily on the Palestinian side. Without the support of its Arab neighbours, Palestine loses a lot of its weight at the bargaining table.

As for Trump’s campaign promise to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, he is neither planning to immediately act on such a move but nor is he backpedalling on the issue. The President has confirmed that he wants to move the embassy but that “we’ll see what happens.”

Ultimately, the major outcome of the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu is the unified front that they presented – a far cry from the discernibly frosty relationship between Netanyahu and Trump’s predecessor, President Obama. Trump certainly made it clear that he would stand with Israel against terrorist threats, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and radical Islam. Netanyahu certainly made his support for Trump clear. He even came to the defense of the President when he was questioned by an Israeli reporter about the increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the U.S. during his campaign and following his election victory as well as accusations of his administration’s use of xenophobic and racist tones, to which Netanyahu intervened by saying that “there is no greater supporter of Israel or the Jewish State than the President”.

Netanyahu clearly came out on top in this first meeting since the inauguration between the two leaders, having secured Trump’s support and made clear the improving relations between the two countries. Trump, meanwhile, seems to still be in campaign-mode. He took the opportunity to complain about “fake media” and their unfair treatment of Michael Flynn, the former National Security Advisor who resigned Monday over contacts he had made with Russia before Trump had taken office.  Trump also blamed the Democrats for the leaking of intelligence to the media, accusing them of “trying to cover up for a terrible loss… under Hillary Clinton.” He later crowed about his election victory, discussing the number of electoral college votes as you might the scores for last Sunday’s Super Bowl game.

However, while this meeting certainly comes off as a victory for Netanyahu, it does not necessarily entail that Israel will be given carte blanche. Trump may not have censured Netanyahu over the settlements, but he certainly made it clear he wants the Israeli Prime Minister to stop for the time being. In addition, the ‘Regularisation Bill’ still has obstacles to face within the Israeli judicial system, but even if it is obstructed, this episode is a foreshadowing of a new U.S. foreign policy towards Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in general. As the flood of executive orders Trump has issued suggests, the new President seems to thrive on the controversial as well as on modelling himself as the antithesis of President Obama. While Trump claims to have “really a great peace deal” in the works, he also does not seem to be overly preoccupied with what the outcome of that peace deal would look like, stating: “So I’m looking at two state and one state and I like the one that both parties like.”

Regardless of how this “great peace deal” works out, Trump certainly is correct when he declares that under his presidency, whatever its duration, we will be seeing a very different America. Netanyahu is certainly going to take advantage of that.