President Trump takes on the Middle East – the US embassy in Israel
Brian M Downing
Donald Trump directed a masterful campaign to win his party’s nomination and go on to win the presidency – both against long odds. Now he must make the transition from issuing rallying cries and partisan jibes to crafting coherent polices and advancing American interests.
The Middle East will command his attention, as it has every president since the close of World War Two, whether they wanted it or not. Donald Trump’s predecessor thought he could settle the issue of a Palestinian state through charisma and will. He was swiftly disabused of that conceit. Mr Trump may face similar disappointments and irritations as he learns that a seemingly simple move can have far-reaching and unexpected consequences in the world.
The capital of Israel
The president-elect has announced intentions to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv, Israel’s former capital, to Jerusalem, the present one since the country took over the West Bank in the Six Day War (1967). The move would be far more than symbolic. It would be, Mr Trump must know, endorsement of the Likud’s settlement policies in the occupied territory and a serious blow to the cause of Palestinian statehood. Anticipating the embassy move, a Likud minister proclaimed, “The era of a Palestinian state is over.” Another era might begin, though.
The Palestinians
Palestinians are angry over the lack of movement on statehood, and the embassy move might trigger another intifada or at least far more attacks on Israeli citizens and soldiers. Shin Bet, Israel’s domestic security bureau, reports that several dozen Palestinians are serving with al Qaeda and ISIL in Syria. They may come home far more lethal than the rock throwers of previous uprisings.
This, however, would play into the Likud’s hand as it would discredit the Palestinian cause in remaining sympathetic parts of the world. It would also provide justification for dismantling and suppressing the Palestinian Authority, making the Likud ministers words more literal than imagined.
The Sunni monarchies
In recent years the Sunni princes have been relatively mute over the Palestinian issue. They have made common cause with Israel in opposing Iran – its nuclear program (now on hold) and its support for Assad in Syria and the Houthis in Yemen.
Their silence, and apparent acquiescence to West Bank settlements, has not gone unnoticed by their restive youth population. The aging princes are losing support owing to their opposition to reform and shrinking largesse as oil revenues fall and stagnate.
Moving the US embassy is unlikely to trigger an immediate response, but it will be many more bricks on the backs of decrepit princely institutions.
Israeli politics
Moving the embassy would not be welcome in all quarters of Israel. Indeed, it would be seen as American meddling in domestic politics – and at a sensitive time in the country’s political history when the Right is being seen as not only wrong but dangerous to the nation’s founding beliefs.
The two-state solution is still avidly supported in the country’s center-left parties, which contain many prominent former generals and security chiefs. Their reasoning includes the principle of a people’s right to self-determination and the practical recognition that Israel is increasingly isolated in the world, especially in the EU, and the march toward de facto appropriation of the West Bank will bring burdensome sanctions.
The EU
Foreign support for the two-state solution is strongest in Europe. Statesmen there are vocal in their support for the Palestinian cause and in their criticism of the Likud’s continued delays and expanding settlements.
Many European leaders and publics are dismayed by Donald Trump’s election. They will be at least somewhat more so by his moving the embassy to Jerusalem and his tacit if not open support for de facto appropriation of the West Bank. It will underscore his bumptious character, ignorance of world affairs, and insensitivity to Muslim voices.
More importantly, it will weaken ties between the US and its NATO partners. The US is already on a collision course with them over their low defense budgets and free-riding on the American military since the end of World War Two.
European dismay could lead to the opening of a chasm with the US – one that will be anticipated, encouraged, and played upon by Vladimir Putin. All his actions around the world center upon his overarching objective of weakening the US and NATO, and reestablishing Russia as a world power.
Copyright 2016 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who has written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs.