We’re in trouble. The world that is. Or at least those who pray for peace in occupied Jerusalem and in the Holy Land.
Some track the current conflict back 100 years to a November 1917 British declaration — cursed by some, commemorated by others. Others to a November 1947 decision to partition Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State. But in the future, we may look back at United States President Donald Trump’s Jerusalem announcement last week as a key turning point.
Before we get to the impact of Trump’s announcement, it’s essential to understand the current chapter of Israeli/Palestinian relations — of both hope and hate — which began 30 years ago. On December 9, 1987, an Israeli military jeep ploughed into a Palestinian vehicle in the Gaza Strip’s Jabaliya refugee camp, killing four. And when the Palestinian public in the West Bank and Gaza — from angry youth to conservative shopkeepers to progressive lawyers — rose up against the Israeli military occupation that dominated their lives, a civilian resistance that was part sit-ins and strikes, part rock-throwing, and part Molotov Cocktail was born. Imperfect as it was, it was that uprising — painful and hopeful — embraced by the West Bank and Gaza’s Palestinian society, and spurred a series of events that led us to where we are today.
It was that 1987 uprising that inspired the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) to bravely accept compromise via an emotional November 15, 1988, ‘Declaration of Independence’ from their 1964 goal to “liberate Palestine” and achieve a “complete restoration of their homeland” to accepting even less than the 1947 partition — a state only on the West Bank and Gaza — a mere fifth of the Holy Land.
It was that 1987 uprising that transformed the Palestinian political position from the unrealistic to the pragmatic. And the world took notice. Ordinary citizens in the Arab world were inspired by the prospects of people power. In a moment when the unthinkable was happening — the Berlin Wall fell, Nelson Mandela was released from prison — why couldn’t the age-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict be solved once and for all? And so former US president George H.W. Bush, with the wind of his success in liberating Kuwait at his back, brought together Israeli, Palestinian and other Arab leaders at the Madrid Conference in the autumn of 1991, based on the premise that the parties could negotiate a solution.
It was that 1987 uprising, which a few years later, in 1993, inspired sworn enemies — Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat — to shake hands on the White House lawn and sign the Oslo Accords under the auspices of former US president Bill Clinton.
All of this was a result of the collective response of Palestinian civil society in the form of an uprising against their completely unsatisfactory situation. Then it was Israeli military occupation. Today it’s a failed peace process. It’s important to remember that uprising, because that force can rise up again.
But now, three decades and thousands of Israeli and (mostly) Palestinian deaths later, the hoped-for peace resulting in two states built on the cry of Palestinian civil society for dignity and independence, and the aspirations of Israelis to finally be accepted by the Arab world in a secure state of their own, is in deep trouble. Countless peace efforts — from Annapolis to Aqaba, including one I personally worked on under the auspices of former US secretary of State John Kerry, and even an Arab Peace Initiative, failed to achieve further progress.
Even before Trump’s announcement, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was already on the precipice: Palestinians were increasingly despondent that facts on the ground meant that it was no longer possible to achieve a state of their own in the West Bank and Gaza.
Israelis themselves seem to have turned away from two states: Just weeks ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated firmly: “The Jordan Valley will always remain part of Israel. We will continue to settle it.” Indeed, the number of Israeli colonists in the West Bank’s 130 colonies has expanded from 270,000 — when the 1993 peace deal was signed — to 400,000 today; 600,000 if occupied East Jerusalem is included. But it’s not just the overall number of colonists. It’s about where they live. About 90,000 live deep in the West Bank on the Palestinian side of the Security Barrier, a number that rose to 20,000 during Barack Obama’s tenure in White House. With the passage of time, the situation has become ever more complicated. Soon, we’ll reach a tipping point where neither Israelis nor Palestinians will believe separation is possible.
Turning back to today, why is the status of Jerusalem such a massive deal? Deeply held religious views make occupied Jerusalem absolutely vital to Christians, Jews and Muslims around the world — and to Israelis and Palestinians on the ground. Decades ago, the international community wisely decided that since no group could live without it, everyone would need a stake in Jerusalem — by sharing it in some meaningful way — for peace to even have the possibility to prevail.
And why do US views matter so much? Because as the broker of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, at least the pretence that Washington would be neutral in negotiations — despite its long-standing support of Israel — was absolutely vital to bring the Palestinians into negotiations under US auspices. Without the pretence of neutrality, Washington would not have the ability to mediate.
So now, following Trump’s Jerusalem announcement, the results have been predictable: The PLO, which entered into the peace process decades ago based on US assurances that all issues would be negotiated, is humiliated. The armed group Hamas is enraged. Arab leaders, who may have wanted to support a compromise will now find it more difficult to do so. Americans overseas (including diplomats) are less secure, as evidenced by the many security warnings issued by US embassies. Israel, which has angered Arab populations throughout the region, is less secure and less likely to be accepted. And by turning its back on the international consensus once again — as the US did in its withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement — Washington has lost the standing to lead in the eyes of the world.
But the most dramatic result is that Trump’s declaration on Jerusalem seems to have completely disqualified the US from its role as a broker in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations in the hearts of the Palestinian people themselves. And the dramatic reduction in US influence over the process makes Israel itself less secure.
So where do we go from here? It’s anyone’s guess.
Trump’s Jerusalem announcement was an earthquake in Palestinian society. Now the Palestinian leadership is gathering to determine their answer.
Will they cling to the sliver of hope that the White House stated it “recognises that the specific boundaries of Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem are subject to final status negotiations between the parties” and stick with the US? Will they continue to strive towards a two-state solution, but abandon Washington as the peace broker? And if so, will there be no broker? Or will another world power — Europe, Russia or China — or a group of them, step in? Will they lead the Palestinian street in another uprising and, if so, will it be a peaceful resistance of Gandhi or a military resistance of Charles de Gaulle? Will they undertake an international diplomatic uprising joining every international organisation and pressing a case against Israel at the International Criminal Court? Or will they abandon the two-state paradigm and demand to live in one democratic state where Arabs and Jews live together with one person, one vote?
The good news is that, for now, the Palestinian National Authority is holding steady and maintaining security cooperation with Israel. But it is Palestinian society that may determine the future if it once again speaks with a collective voice.
Is there anything that the Trump administration can do to salvage the situation in the eyes of the Palestinians? The clarifications made during a December 7 US State Department briefing that the US “is not taking or changing a position on the boundaries of sovereignty in Jerusalem” is completely falling on deaf ears in the Palestinian street. Although the PLO leadership might understand this nuance, it is unclear if that will affect its ability to manage public opinion.
What the US could do — specifically on the question of occupied Jerusalem — is encourage the government of Israel to change its policies there in a manner that makes the Palestinians feel they have a real stake in the Holy City’s future. That includes: Allowing the reopening of the many Palestinian institutions in occupied East Jerusalem closed in 2001, such as the Arab Chamber of Commerce. Announcing that if Palestinians hold legislative elections in 2018, Palestinian residents of occupied East Jerusalem would be allowed to vote in those elections, as in the past. Halting the frequent denial of residency permits to West Bank spouses of Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem. And dramatically easing the restrictions on the ability of Palestinians to build housing for themselves, or even renovate, in occupied East Jerusalem.
At this point, there are few words the US can speak that can make a difference. America will be judged by its own actions, and those of its ally, Israel. As we learned through the uprising that began in 1987, it is the hopes, dreams, and actions of the Palestinian people who will shape the future. It will guide the actions of their leaders. It will form the views of the world. And will provoke a response from Israel.
But for better or worse, unless this US president — or possibly the next — has the courage to take new and dramatic steps in this area, the decades-old chapter of US leadership in the Israeli-Palestinian arena may have come to a close. And who knows, given America’s failure thus far — in which I am admittedly complicit — that may not be such a bad thing.
— Washington Post
Hady Amr served in the Barack Obama administration from 2010 to 2017 as deputy assistant administrator for the Middle East and as deputy special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
