How is the defeat of the Republicans in the midterm elections being viewed in the Arab media?

The defeat of President Donald Trump's Republican Party in America's midterm elections has special significance for Arab countries.

This election result will also affect Trump's Middle East policies. Vice President JD Vance has already said that the Republican Party has lost due to the attack on Iran.

Obviously, this 'confession' of JD Vance also raises questions on Trump's foreign policy.

The defeat of the Republican Party is being seen in a similar manner in the Arab media also. However, there is a difference in the views of different media organizations regarding what the further consequences of this defeat will be.

Some media outlets have portrayed it as a clear public protest against Trump's politics, while others have focused on the weakening presidential power, conflicts with Congress, and increasing uncertainty for the Middle East.

The important thing is that the electoral setback is not everywhere being seen as the end of Trump's political influence.

UAE's English newspaper The National has written in one of its articles, "By losing control over Congress, Trump's political powers, which he was using in the first two years of his tenure, have been significantly limited." Their political rights and influence have been severely limited.

The National has written in another analysis that the Democrats will no longer allow Trump to take unilateral decisions on the Iran war and the Middle East.

The newspaper's focus is not only on who won the election, but also on to what extent the powers of the President can be limited.

'Arab News' gave prominence to Trump's admission, in which he admitted that the Iran war became a reason for the election defeat of the Republican Party.

Al-Arabi Al-Jadid has written that American voters are punishing Trump.

In Al-Arabi Al-Jadid's article, Mohammed Al-Bedawi presents this election as a personal anger of the voters against Trump and his punishment, rather than a general electoral defeat of the ruling party.

His argument is that Trump turned this contest into a referendum on himself through the election campaign and selection of candidates. He associated Republican candidates with his unpopular policies.

The report links the election results to the Iran war, rising fuel prices, tariffs and unfulfilled economic promises. In this, the responsibility for the defeat of the Republican Party has been put not only on the adverse electoral circumstances, but also on Trump's decisions.

In the context of the future, the article argues that after this defeat, Trump can either soften his stance or adopt the path of retaliatory action.

The article quotes Peter Loge of George Washington University as saying that when Trump feels cornered, he becomes more vocal and intensifies his attacks.

It sees vetoes, executive orders, and congressional investigations as possible means of coming conflict.

The special aspect of this analysis is that losing the majority in Congress may not only reduce Trump's powers, but it may also change how he uses his remaining powers.

Al Jazeera Arabic has published an analysis by political scientist Jamal Qasmi. Qasmi argues that Trump made his declining popularity a disadvantage for Republican candidates by actively participating in the election campaign and emphasizing candidates loyal to his choice. He cites three main reasons behind the electoral defeat: the election being focused on Trump's personality and leadership, economic dissatisfaction caused by tariffs, the impact of the Iran war on inflation.

The article draws comparisons with former President George W. Bush's 2006 election campaign. At that time, Bush had shown relatively little activity in campaigning with weaker candidates. Qasmi suggests that Trump also could have limited the electoral damage by maintaining some distance from weaker candidates.

Qasmi predicts that now the political attention will shift towards the 2028 presidential election and the politics around Trump will weaken.

Rana Abtar in Asharq Al-Awsat has tried to understand this election from the perspective of institutional forces rather than political humiliation or personal defeat of any leader.

Based on conversations with Democratic Party strategist Nicole Brenner Schmitz, former Republican Party communications officer Douglas Hay and David Smith of 'The Guardian', the article explains what practical changes could happen if Democrats take control of Congress.

Importantly, experts have distinguished between these powers and the notion that the Democrats' first priority will be impeachment. Its other aspect has also been put forward in the article. Control over Congress does not mean that Democrats will gain complete control over policy decisions.

The mandatory voting process in the Senate, the presidential veto and the power of executive orders could limit the Democrats' chances. The article also draws attention to a strategic challenge. The question before the Democrats will be whether they should give priority to fixing accountability or try to show improvement in the living standards of the common people before 2028.

Nesreen Malik in Al-Quds Al-Arabi argues that an election defeat may weaken Trump, but it will not end the institutions, policies and political practices that were promoted during his rule.

It emphasizes the difficulties of reversing changes made in law enforcement, government agencies, tariffs, and foreign policy regarding immigrants.

This article distinguishes between the end of an era of Trump's rule and the complete end of his political influence.

Democrats have also been criticized in this. The article discusses differences within the opposition party over its political identity, generational change, progressive candidates and the issue of Israel.

It warns that defeating Trump in the elections and creating a strong and sustainable political alternative to him are two different things.

If the Republican Party maintains the key issues of Trump's politics, then it may face competition from a Democratic Party which is united mainly on the basis of opposition to Trump.

The special aspect of this analysis is that Trump's election defeat should not be seen as the decisive end of Trumpism.

How is it being seen in Iranian media? On one hand, Trump's election defeat is being presented as political punishment for the war against Iran. On the other hand, some analyzes have warned that despite becoming weak, Trump may adopt the path of confrontation with Iran.

Ehsan Etesam in Tehran Times considers the election results as a sign that Trump's foreign policy decisions are now becoming an electoral burden for the Republican Party.

His analysis focuses on the contradiction between Trump's promise to keep the US out of costly wars and his long-running confrontation with Iran.

The article also raises the question whether the Republican Party will reconsider its relations with Israel. In this, the Iran war has been described as an issue which can affect the political direction of the entire party rather than harming just one President.

However, the author also admits that the Iran war was not the only reason behind the defeat of the Republican Party.

The article does not predict the end of Trumpism. It also acknowledged Trump's continuing influence among Republican voters and his powers as president and supreme commander of the military.

On the one hand, in the coverage of Iranian media, the American election results are being presented as public opinion against Trump's Iran policy. On the other hand, some analysts also accept that despite the election defeat, there is no guarantee of immediate change in America's foreign policy.

The most interesting aspect is that even the Iranian media does not have a celebratory attitude towards the election results. Some analyzes focus on the role of the US Congress and Trump's limited political power, while others warn that a weak president could also increase military or economic pressure against Iran.