Quick context about what happens after Trump's Jerusalem declaration, because I have a few minutes:
First, Arab regimes will find it very difficult to openly deal with Trump now. They will of course continue to but no more public displays of respect. This by itself fuels conspiracy narratives by various radicals.
You won't see Trump received at any Arab or Muslim capital with sword dances anytime soon. No public reproachment either.
Second, Arab regimes that seemed *close* to normalizing relations with Israel (certain key Gulf regimes) now won't touch it with a ten foot pole. All public reproachment initiatives with Israel killed for now.
Also killed are any prospects of military or strategic cooperation between Israel and KSA/UAE vs Iran, that MBS et al wants. MBS may be reckless but not suicidal.
Most importantly though is what already happened: Arab masses see this as another sign of failure and delegitimization of their regimes. They don't expect much from the US, or Israel, anyway.
Another grievance piled upon more grievances the Arab public have against their governments. Another stone in the coffin of the Arab ancien regime's legitimacy, and a slap in the face of the KSA/UAE axis.
The biggest benefactors of this move would be the Iranian axis (anti US, anti-Israel etc), and Erdogan (with his own Islamist narratives). Also jihadists, various Islamists etc.
Finally, this is the final obituary to the two-state solution for the foreseeable future. Different parties will deal with this very differently.
Some will keep grabbing on to it as it sinks, others will look for other options (including open violence or brute force), others will (hopefully) start exploring a shift of resistance narratives towards a one-state solution.
I'm a Palestinian myself, but this opinion of mine is a minority one: What can completely flip the tables is a shift from a struggle of national liberation to a struggle for civil rights, under a one state solution.
This is of course easier said than done, and I am fully aware of the immense complexities and difficulties. Knowing I'm in the minority doesn't mean much however, many movements start out as minority movements.
The biggest threat to the idea of Israel as a pure ethnic state - a "Jewish" state - isn't military but demographic. In a way Israel *needs* a Palestinian state to ensure a Jewish majority in the "Jewish" state.
Current Israeli leaders think that they can push Palestinians into cantons (think Bantustans, but for Palestinians), or squeeze Palestinians to emigrate (where?), or simply keep crushing them indefinitely. This is unsustainable.
Of course there are geostrategic reasons why Israel can't withdraw to 1948 borders, but these same reasons are why it's not possible for two nationalistm to coexist on this land. Two people? Yes. Two nationalism? No.
History is full of defeated national liberation struggles, but arguably you can't find a single struggle for civil rights that was resoundingly defeated, ever.
Note that a shift to a struggle of civil rights will not find support among Arab regimes because it threatens them too. They can't support civil rights when they are crushing them in their own countries.
A shift to a civil rights struggle will also threaten violence-based movements including Jihadists, who will (of course, and for good reason) argue that violence is the only way. But also - rights-based narratives are totally alien to them.
For us to move towards justice we need to shift the balance of power, and power isn't always military. Military power can only get you so far.
And yes I know just how quixotic this sounds, spare me your beration. But my opinion is as valid as any because I'm not an alien to this, I'm a Palestinian whose family lived in Jaffa for as long as we can trace our lineage, up until the Nakba.
