Tag: jerusalem
Lost, but not paradise
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace hosted a discussion Wednesday with Daniel Seidemann, founder and director of Terrestrial Jerusalem. He was joined by Zaha Hassan, a human rights lawyer and visiting fellow at the Carnegie Middle East program. They reviewed recent events in Israel and Jerusalem and discussed the implications for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the near future.
Seidemann’s portrayal of the political future in Israel was bleak. The move by the Trump administration to relocate the American embassy to Jerusalem was the death knell for American leadership in the crisis. Worse, there is no other state willing and able to fill America’s role as neutral arbiter in the conflict. Seidemann warned that hopelessness, which he called “the great destabilizer”, now reigned in East Jerusalem. He expressed no confidence in the ability of the current administration to approach Jerusalem with the seriousness that it deserves, or even recognize what he characterized as the basic fact of occupation in East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the West Bank. Instead he characterized the American policy as “buy them and break them” hoping to stifle dissent with budgetary crumbs, combined with a bleak situation intended to break Palestinian political will.
Seidemann also warned that Israel, along with most of the West, is in danger of sliding into authoritarianism. Institutions are under attack all across Israel. Netanyahu will be attending the inauguration of Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s new President-elect who more than toyed with fascism while on the campaign trail. Netanyahu’s move towards authoritarianism is largely due to the noose around his neck: he faces the specter of imminent indictment on corruption charges, which he hopes to ride out and remain in office.
Domestic pressure may play a part in pushing Netanyahu towards construction of two “doomsday” settlements: the E1 settlement in East Jerusalem which would create a bottleneck in the West Bank, and another settlement which would sit between East Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Both settlements would create a serious barrier to the realization of a continuous Palestinian state, as well as displace Palestinians from their homes in numbers unseen since 1997. Though this plan has been paused in the past due to international pressure, it is conceivable given the vacuum of American leadership that Netanyahu may move to strengthen his base in Israel.
Zaha offered an overview of Palestinian strategy in the wake of American withdrawal as an effective mediator. Palestinians have engaged in a flurry of international engagement, hoping to advocate for themselves on the world stage. They filed a complaint to the UN Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the first ever state-to-state complaint handled by the UN. The committee, consisting of experts on racial discrimination, will tackle among other issues the accusation of apartheid in Israel.
Another complaint has been lodged with the International Criminal Court, and deals with human rights violations committed on Palestinian territory. Since many of the allegations have taken place in East Jerusalem the case will necessarily involve a ruling on whether East Jerusalem is part of the territory of the Palestinian State.
A case in the International Court of Justice questions whether the US can legally relocate its embassy to Jerusalem given the city’s special status. While the US under Trump will likely ignore an unfavorable ruling, the decision will have repercussions for states who are considering an embassy move but seek to abide by international law.
The situation in Israel underlines the need for a renewed American policy in the Middle East. Seidemann urged that it is not too soon to begin considering what American policy in Israel should be after Trump, but he warned against viewing previous American policy as paradise lost, saying “it is lost, but it’s not paradise.” Instead America needs a new plan for thoughtful leadership in the Middle East, free of gimmicks and mindful that the world is no longer unipolar. The silver lining to America’s withdrawal under Trump is an opportunity to reconstitute US foreign policy.