Why Is Trump Moving On Jerusalem Now? For A President Who Has Struggled To Fulfil...
08 December 2017By Ben White
In comparison to the focus on opposition to the move and its possible
ramifications, relatively little has been said about why Donald Trump's
administration has decided to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital and
signal its intent to relocate the US embassy from Tel Aviv.
For example, one widely-shared piece of analysis does not really answer the
question in its title, namely, "Why is Trump undoing decades of US policy on
Jerusalem?"
I believe there are three main reasons, none of which are mutually exclusive.
First, US domestic politics. Today's announcement plays well with Trump's base
amongst right-wing Christian evangelicals, as well as with the likes of
influential individuals like Sheldon Adelson. "Hallelujah!" proclaims
alt-right site Breitbart's main splash today, welcoming the news.
The fact that such constituencies are already committed to Trump does not rule
out the fact that policy steps can be taken as a gift to the converted;
Trump-ism has never been about building wide coalitions, or reaching out
across various divides, but about energising and mobilising a base.
Don't forget, of course, that a pledge to move the US embassy to Jerusalem was
part of Trump's election campaign; for a president who has struggled to fulfil
his promises, a win is a win.
Second, Benjamin Netanyahu, along with other senior Israeli officials, might
well have done a good job in persuading the Trump administration to make such
a move - something that the likes of Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and US
envoy to Israel David Friedman would be personally amenable to anyway.
For Netanyahu - and this is already evident in remarks made this morning -
such a shift in American policy fits nicely with his narrative about a
confident, nationalistic Israel expanding its diplomatic ties, the warnings of
international isolation from his political enemies shown to be hollow threats.
Whether Trump's decision on Jerusalem is actually in the best interests of
Netanyahu, or his coalition, is a separate matter; but misguided or otherwise,
Netanyahu would appear to have been urging the Trump administration to take
such a step.
Third - and this is perhaps where many commentators are missing a trick - the
Trump administration might well envisage, and justify, the Jerusalem shift in
the context of its much-heralded efforts at securing the "deal of the
century".
At first glance this can seem counter-intuitive, since everyone from Jordan to
the European Union has criticised the Jerusalem announcement as detrimental to
efforts at advancing so-called Israeli-Palestinian "peace" and a "two-state
solution".
In fact, the Trump administration is more likely to view, and present, the
Jerusalem move as a gesture to Israel that will create the expectancy or
pressure for a corresponding "gesture" in return, such as economic-focused
measures in the occupied West Bank.
Whether or not this calculation quite adds up, is another question - though
Mahmoud Abbas and his team have, over the years, demonstrated a notable
capacity for giving US efforts "one more chance".
In other words, rather than being an inexplicable spanner in the works of the
Trump administration's wider efforts at birthing the "ultimate deal", the
White House - and perhaps Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman too - may
well see the move as part and parcel of that very project (hence the weak
response, thus far, from Riyadh).
On the ground, meanwhile, the reality for Palestinian residents of what is an
apartheid city remains unchanged: home demolitions, municipal discrimination,
brutal raids, and settler-driven displacement. This is Jerusalem's grim
reality that, by their long-standing inaction, Israel's allies have played a
crucial role in facilitating. Trump thus joins a crowded field of the
complicit.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments