Trump on Jerusalem: a
quintessential Netanyahu
OPINION / ISRAEL
OPINION
Jerusalem will
never be the capital of
a settler colony
by Hamid
Dabashi
Marwan Bishara
Marwan Bishara is the senior political
Jerusalem Israel Donald Trump
Politics Middle East
US President Donald Trump paid his first official
visit to Jerusalem in May, 2017 [Reuters]
Arabs and Muslims hoping to hear
directly from Donald Trump on his
new policy on Jerusalem on Wednesday
must have been shocked to witness the
United States president deliver an
Israeli speech instead. The tone was
Trump, but the words and spin were all
Benjamin Netanyahu .
Trump's claim that officially
recognising Jerusalem as the capital of
Israel was merely "recognising reality"
is pure Israeli reasoning - central to the
occupation's strategy of creating facts
on the ground.
Palestinians know this. Arabs know this.
The international community knows it,
too. They all know that if you give an
inch of Jerusalem to Israel, it will take
the lot, and in the process, undermine
peace efforts and cause havoc.
The US Congress also knew this, which
is why they put a waiver clause in the
original 1995 US Embassy Act in the
first place. Three previous US
presidents also knew it, which is why
they used the waiver to avoid
implementing it for more than 20 years.
And everyone - from the world leaders
who called Trump to warn him, to the
state department officials and
diplomats who advised him against his
decision - knew that as well.
Netanyahu knows it too. Did Trump?
Maybe, but it was too late. He had
drunk Netanyahu's Koolaid.
If there was ever doubt in the Arab
mind about Israeli tail wagging the US
dog, it dissipated with Trump's latest
statement on Jerusalem. Within
minutes, the Israeli premier appeared
smug on television to thank the
American president for recognising
Jerusalem as capital of the "Jewish
state", and encouraged others to follow
suit.
For decades, many of ruling
elites of Arab states exploited
the cause of Palestine and
Israeli desecration of Jerusalem
for their own interests.
Mahmoud Abbas was furious . He
accused the Trump administration of
rewarding aggression and inflaming
religious extremism. It was a
humiliating moment for the Palestinian
president who long placed his bets on
Washington and the peace process only
to see it destroyed with one speech.
For all practical matter, the speech is
the product of President Trump's
closest advisers since before he became
president and the trio entrusted for the
"Peace Process": David Freedman,
Trump's ambassador to Israel, Jason
Greenblatt, his diplomatic ambassador
at large, and his son-in-law Jared
Kushner. The three New Yorkers are
ultra-Zionists and stand to the right of
Benjamin Netanyahu on the questions
of unconditional support for Israeli
settlements in the occupied Palestinian
territories. They are actual sponsors of
illegal settlements themselves.
Imagine if an
American
president
appointed three
American-
Islamist Hamas
sympathisers to
run US Israel policy.
Trump's announcement is a violation of
international law, to cite French
President Emmanuel Macron . The
speech in its totality is a declaration of
war on Palestinian rights, wrapped in
peace rhetoric. It's devoid of any
mention of Palestinian plight or US
commitment to a two-state solution.
Which explains the appearance of the
UN Secretary General briefly right after
the speech to insist that there's no
alternative to two states solution with
Jerusalem as capital of both states.
It humiliates the US' Middle Eastern
friends and as Palestinian leaders say,
disqualifies for good the US' role as
broker in any peace process. Its
emphasis on historic if not exclusive
Jewish rights to Jerusalem and Palestine
will further weaken the so-called
moderate Arab camp, and embolden US
detractors and extremists across the
region, especially in Iran.
Even before the speech, Arab and
Muslims leaders, including Trump's
newfound friends, expressed their
concern, criticism and outright
condemnation of Washington's decision
to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv
to Jerusalem. After the speech, these
leaders called for emergency meetings
of the Arab League and the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation
(OIC), which has 57 members, in the
coming days.
If [Arab leaders] don't rise to
the occasion and meet the
expectations of their bitter and
angry citizens, the US will
continue to reward Israel for its
aggression and Trump's much
anticipated 'ultimate deal' will
be no more than the ultimate
humiliation that pushes the
region towards the brink.
So what? Ask the sceptics.
US haters couldn't hate the US any
more than they already do, and US
allies wouldn't jeopardise their
relations with Washington for the
Palestinians' sake. The Arab regimes
issue statements and declarations for
public consumption only. In reality,
they are too weak or too divided to do
anything about it. The entire Arab
order has imploded in recent years
under the pressures of civil wars and
regional conflicts.
For decades, many of ruling elites of
Arab states exploited the cause of
Palestine and Israeli desecration of
Jerusalem for their own interests. And
today, a new generation of leaders is
willing to abandon the Palestinians and
Jerusalem altogether to enhance their
power base with US and, yes, Israeli
support. This was best expressed last
week in a new Saudi hashtag gone viral:
"Riyadh is more important than
Jerusalem", as its new rulers began to
warm up to Israel under US tutelage.
All of which explains the timing and
aggressive temperament of the US
position.
The US's longest-serving envoy to the
peace process, Dennis Ross, has written
an entire book, Doomed to Succeed, to
reel against Washington obsession with
balancing relations between Israel and
the Arab world and caring too much for
Arab sensitivity. A vocal Zionist, he
argued that American leaders didn't
learn from the lessons of their
predecessors who naively give weight
to Arab positions on Israel, when
according to Ross, Palestine is not the
Arabs' priority.
Regardless of whether his claims are
true or otherwise, the current US
administration seems to subscribe to
Ross's theory. Trump called his Arab
allies to inform not consult them about
his dangerous decision on Jerusalem.
Despite their plea for a softer and
slower approach, Trump decided to
kick them where it hurts, while at the
same time, express support for their
stance against Iran - in return for their
compromises on Palestine. However,
it's Iran that has come out on top this
week, thanks to Trump's Netanyahu
emulation.
The so-called moderates may have
registered their rejection of the US
move, but it remains to be seen in the
days and weeks to come whether Arab
leaders will do more than hold meetings
and issue empty statements.
If they don't rise to the occasion and
meet the expectations of their bitter
and angry citizens, the US will continue
to reward Israel for its aggression and
Trump's much anticipated "ultimate
deal" will be no more than the ultimate
humiliation that pushes the region
towards the brink.
Why are British Muslim marriages unprotected by law? FEATURE / ISLAM MUSLIM MARRIAGE IN THE UK 60 percent Muslim marriages religious-only, unregistered 28 percent do not realise Islamic ceremony not legally recognised 66 percent know union has no legal status 50 percent do not intend to have marriage legalised - Source: Channel 4 survey Aina Khan Aina Khan is a journalist focusing on race, faith and identity. She's reading a masters in religion in politics at SOAS. @ ainajkhan United Kingdom Islam Europe, Maureen, right, was not entitled to financial support after her husband Rashid - the father of her child - passed away [Courtesy: Maureen] London, England - When Maureen wed her husband Rashid in a Muslim ceremony in 1973 in Bradford, she knew that should the relationship fall apart, she would not be entitled to share his assets. Her marriage was sanctified in the eyes of God, but in the eyes of the state it was "unregistered", not legal, and so financial protection...
Comments