The policies announced by the new President of the United States, Donald Trump, are different from those of his predecessors in that he intends to follow a plan that may lead to a new kind of isolation, focusing on pure American interests. “America first” in any mutual interests with other countries or when faced with threats, was one of his election campaign slogans. It is thus understood that no country would in fact enjoy a special relationship with the US. But Patrick Buchanan, a founding editor of the American Conservative, in his article titled ‘Israel First or America First’, wrote that Trump had announced “America First” following his inauguration and now he has a new best friend in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. By taking office, any pressures on Israel will end and the colony constructions will continue, he said. Buchanan noted that “the two-state solution is almost dead” and Netanyahu is not going to remove thousands of Jewish colonists “to cede the land to a Palestinian state”. He asked “how will all this impact the new Trump administration?” Trump, he wrote, is certain “to tilt US policy heavily towards Israel”. Nevertheless, is this an inevitable destiny?
What if we declare “America First” in the Middle East? Should we then conclude that it is in the interest of the US to find a just, or at least a reasonable solution, to the Palestinian cause, considering that the current Israeli policy harms the higher American interests as regards this issue? The question becomes valid, especially with Trump announcing that it is time to reconsider US foreign policy, including its policy towards the Middle East. The comments followed a statement by the White House announcing that “while we don’t believe the existence of settlements [colonies] is an impediment to peace, the construction of new settlements [colonies] or the expansion of existing settlements [colonies] beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal”.
It is well-known that most world leaders were not enthusiastic towards Trump’s election as US president, except for a few, including Netanyahu and Jewish “settlers” [colonists] who look to receive two gifts he had promised Israel: Moving the American embassy from Tel Aviv to occupied Jerusalem; and supporting and fattening the Jewish colonies in occupied West Bank. Over the past few decades, Israel’s higher interests have made the US suffer losses in the Middle East. The American military presence in the region led to counterproductive results and was targeted as a reaction, which encouraged the emergence of an ongoing wave of resistance and terrorism by certain military and political groups all over the Middle East and the larger Muslim world.
Indeed, many experts, both military and politicians, concluded that any political move to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict away from the proposed two-state solution would be futile, especially with the continued occupation of the West Bank and the expansion of Jewish “colonies” in occupied West Bank, including eastern Jerusalem. Trump, early in his election campaign, revealed a strong bias towards Israel, pledging first to move the US embassy to occupied Jerusalem and appointing David Friedman as the new US Ambassador to Tel Aviv. Friedman is known as one of Israel’s strongest supporters, mainly of its internationally-condemned Jewish colony policy. Moreover, Trump and his Jewish son-in-law businessman Jared Kushner are among donors to the American Friends of Beit El organisation, which supports building colony on Palestinian land — a practice that antagonises 1.5 billion Arabs and Muslims. Do such acts help “America First” interests?
Israeli analyst Ariel Bolstein recently wrote that former US president Barack Obama began his term in office with his ill-fated Cairo speech, in which he tried to extend a hand to the Muslim Brotherhood Movement. He said Trump now begins his term by meeting Netanyahu. What a big difference, he commented. Bolstein said “that setting a date for the meeting with Netanyahu (February 15) sends a symbolic message to Israel or its leader. Israel is an important ally of America. Trump, (Bolstein) went on to say, had promised that things will change dramatically and Israel will not have to be afraid of betrayal of its major friend (i.e. America), especially in the United Nations (Security Council and General Assembly and all UN agencies). The time has come, he said, to honour promises, and as seen in other issues, the new American president meets his promises perfectly well”. He at least tries! Yet, Buchanan was insightful in his previously-mentioned article by concluding that “having America publicly reassert herself as Israel’s best friend, with ‘no daylight’ between us, could have us ending up as Israel’s only friend — and Israel as our only friend in the Middle East. Bibi’s (Netanyahu) ‘Israel First’ policy must one day collide with America First”.
The US spent decades providing economic, political, diplomatic and military support to Israel at the expense of Palestinian people and the Arab nation, which had a deep negative impact on its image and interests. In this regard, Israeli writer B. Michael, in his article titled ‘Mr President, take the money you give Israel and run’, wrote: “Follow your own slogan (America First) and simply set yourself free of us ... Stop funding us, maintaining us, pampering us! So extricate yourself from our swamp. Take the money and run ... so we might finally come back to our senses.” Now, with the arguments being floated, will Trump, the businessman, ask Israel — specifically in the interest of “America First” — for a price worthy to be paid to the Palestinians and Arabs in return for such an American generosity?
Professor As’ad Abdul Rahman is the chairman of the Palestinian Encyclopaedia.