U.S and Palestine under Trump: A roll back to Pre-Oslo times?

With President Donald Trump assuming office as 45th U.S President, relations between Palestine and U.S kicked off with bubbling goodwill and high-spirited gestures by both sides. Mehmud Abbas’s hailed visit at White House on May 3, 2017 with President Trump applauding the “positive ongoing partnership between the United States and the Palestinians” was soon reciprocated by Trump’s presence in Bethlehem, and Mehmud Abbas calling him a “dear friend”.

But this cordiality did not take very long to vanish due to the dual and contradictory policy President Trump adopted regarding Middle East. Since the beginning,Trump administration had been working on two parallel policies; the first was extremely in favour of Israel with Trump’s pledge of declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and shifting of U.S Embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. However, the second one vividly in contrast to the former was aimed at the objective to attain the “ultimate deal” to bring peace to the Middle East. Working on this two-pronged agenda, the U.S while exploring for more stakeholders in peace-process and searching for more Arab states which were eager to begin relations with Israel, did not fail to shock the Palestinians (who long being victim of getting substituted by Arab states acting as an “agency” on behalf of Palestinians in decision-making processes regarding them, viewed this strategy no lesser than a plan of marginalising them). This mistrust stretched out of bounds to obliterate the relations with the Trump Administration and the Palestinian-U.S relations nosedived on December 6, 2017 with the U.S proclamation of recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The tragic situation aggravated with shifting of U.S embassy to the contested city of Jerusalem this year, adding to the insult Palestinians faced, who claim Jerusalem to be the future capital of their state.

In the subsequent months a multitude of U.S actions ignited the anger and frustration of the Palestinians. These include the curtailing of $300 million worth of U.S aid to UNRWA which is the U.N agency and caters to the Palestinian refugees. This was done under the desire to bring an end to UNRWA’s policy of providing recognition to the descendants of Palestinian refugees under the title of“refugees”, since U.S officials such as Nikki Haley deems that Palestinian refugees’ right of return is abhorred by Israel therefore, it must be kept “off the table”.Palestinians dread that Washington, by doing so, is endeavouring to denounce legitimacy to their refugee brethren.This U.S strategy would be enough to fuel the fire already burning in Palestinian lands, by intensifying economic and humanitarian crisis in the Occupied- Territories.

In a recent order of September 10, 2018, the Trump administration has commanded the shuttering of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Office in Washington. The step is intensely emblematic and due to its potential of deteriorating the already agitated Palestinian-U.S relations, the mission’s shutting down has now developed into a major critical moment.U.S administration believes that taking such prohibitive measures, acts as sticks for compelling the Palestinians to negotiate.While on the other hand, the PLO perceives it as an evidence enough of the US intentions of sidelining them and refuting Palestinians’ rightful representation, protesting over Trump administration’s employing of the issue as a blackmailing tactic to force Palestinians into signing a peace deal, being largely thought of by the critics as one that would highly be tilted in Israel’s favour. The Taylor Force Act which everyone seems to believe is for cutting aid to Palestinians, in reality holds the main purpose, to have as a matter of U.S law, prove that PLO and PA are supporting terrorism.

Trump’s conduct is attracting reactionary policies by the Palestinian authorities. The aforementioned policies of Trump administration are highly illustrative of the “transactional” foreign policy approach adopted by President Trump in line with his business- oriented mentality but are extremely ill-formulated in terms of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Therefore, they have been and will persist to cast massive detrimental effects on Middle Eastern regional security, keeping Palestinian dignity, identity, and human rights at higher risk. Palestinian authorities, thus, decided to reach International Criminal Court (ICC) against the U.S and Israel, requesting for a probe into crimes and atrocities perpetrated by Israel in Palestine. As expected,the move did not go very well in U.S administrative circles and compelled National security adviser John Bolton warning ICC not to scrutinise any actions committed by Israel’s security forces against the Palestinians. Human Rights Watch asserts that such warnings by U.S,obstructing ICC investigations would exhibit administration overprotecting the human rights abusers instead of encouraging provision of justice.

Regarding Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) as a terrorist, or pariah organisation instead of recognising it as a legitimate organisation of Palestinian people, U.S has remained incapable of finding solutions of main predicaments of the conflict namely Jerusalem, the refugee conundrum, the Occupied Palestinian Territories of West Bank and Gaza. Talks between Israel and the Arabs over the last four decades remained largely unsuccessful because they have perpetually barred Palestinian representatives from the dialogue. President Jimmy Carter, though the pioneer of recognising about the need for Palestinian “homeland”, denied involving the organisation into any dialogue process due to deep-rooted U.S policy of regarding PLO as an outcast. Therefore, while the Palestinian issues were being discussed at Camp David involving Israel and Egypt, Carter’s insistence kept Palestinians off the table. The results being highly skewed against the Palestinians, and against Carter’s “comprehensive peace.”

The foremost and fundamental leap forward in Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy appeared in 1993 when Palestinians, for the first time, negotiated on their own, as true representation of Palestinian people. The Oslo Accord signed between Israel and PLO in September 1993, established the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) as a self-governing interim administration in the Palestinian territories. The key significance of Oslo was a reciprocated acknowledgement by PLO and Israel of each other and the competence to decipher the puzzles of their relationship. But the foremost element was the persistence of the notion of a “Palestinian five-year autonomy”, instead of provision of a fully sovereign self- rule and statehood, which had emerged from the 1978 Camp David agreement between Israel and Egypt and was affirmed at the Madrid summit.

A quarter century has passed since then but the still majority of the West Bank territory endures direct military control by Israel. Shattered by long stretches of hostility and incessant mushrooming of Israeli settlements, the hopefulness of the post- Oslo era was swapped by admonitions pronouncing two-state solution to be dead. Charles Krauthammer referred Oslo Accords as “one of the great miscalculations in diplomatic history.” The Oslo generation of today living in occupied territories consider signing Oslo Accords as a huge mistake and when the accounts of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be documented in full, this post- Oslo phase would certainly be charted as the darkest era!

With 13th September marking the 25th anniversary of the Oslo Accords for a lasting Middle Eastern peace process and 17th September completing four decades of Camp David Accords, and the Trump administration’s announcement of closing of PLO’s office coming just in nick of time, indicates that the U.S has determined to alter its approach concerning Palestinian conflict. Trump’s administration has distanced from the policies of the former Presidents and is first to immaturely encourage Israel while pursuing diplomatic row with the Palestinians. He claims to have the potential of concluding the “ultimate deal” or a “deal of the century” for the settlement of the conflict, all the while refusing the idea of a two-state solution. He certainly is preparing a ‘recipe for chaos’ since by estranging Palestinians and not embracing them in the discussion, in fact, is the very dilemma that has dented all efforts for pursuit of peace by U.S in the Middle East.

With the world pinning its full attention on the “deal of the century”, the leadership in Palestine has finally declined any efforts by Washington as a mediator. Palestinians have never consented to any settlement impressed by foreign powers and its totally wrong of President Trump to think that they are going to do so now under U.S pressure. All these coercive and exclusionary policies of U.S, holding a strong narrative, is resetting and rolling back relations to a pre-Oslo period. Endorsing and taking sides with Israel, has strengthened Israel’s anti- Palestinian rhetoric with its Education Minister, Naftali Bennet declaring Palestine as a “fake state” and Netanyahu intensifying his rhetoric talking about “state minus”. With the Palestinian society comprising of youth bulge of about 30-40%, already having high frustration level, involved in a serious Great March of Return under their struggle against occupation, this means that a period of confounding violence, and augmented level of state-led violent activities against nonviolent Palestinian protesters, is not subsiding in a foreseeable near future. Employing recent measures, the Trump administration possibly have expended all the diplomatic tools to pressurise and blackmail Palestinians for its anticipated goals, and the volatile situation created thus is baleful for the peace process. To forge peace between all stakeholders, is not an easy job, but what could be learnt from the times forlorn is undoubtedly that the solitary option available for doing so is to embrace both Israel and the Palestinians, the principal parties.

By Sana Imtiaz Kitchlew
(The author holds Master of Philosophy in International Relations from School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University. She is a political analyst and is currently engaged in her independent post graduate research regarding Youth Bulges, Palestine and Kashmir issues)