Tag: Israel/Palestine
No Nobel Prize
Amy Hawthorne, who knows more about the Middle East than Jared Kushner will ever learn, tweeted yesterday:
Amy W. Hawthorne@awhawthTo state the obvious, the “peace in the Middle East” theme touted by Trump and Kushner re UAE-Israel agreement is disconnected from reality given that the 2 countries never fought a war and the agreement does nothing to end today’s actual Middle East wars
just details I guess
But maybe a bit more explication is required, especially in response to the right-wing hoopla about getting a Nobel Prize for their dear leader.
As Amy suggests, the agreement between Israel and the Emirates has nothing to do directly with any past or current conflict in the Middle East. There is no history between them of bombardment, invasion, expulsion, displacement, or occupation.* The UAE has participated directly or through proxies in wars in Yemen, Syria, and Libya, but those have little or nothing to do with Israel.
Kushner, who designed Trump’s still-born proposal for peace with the Palestinians, likes to pretend that the agreement with the UAE will advance that prospect. It is more likely to dim it. It weakens and divides Palestinian support in the Arab world at a time when Israel is already so strong it feels no real pressure to negotiate. While the UAE extracted suspension of Israel’s plans to annex Palestinian land, that provision is temporary. Kushner, a strong supporter of Israelis settlements in the West Bank intended to block formation of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state, is interested in Palestinian surrender to a one-state solution with unequal rights. That won’t do anything for Middle East peace.
Trump’s presidency has significantly worsened prospects not only for peace between Israelis and Palestinians but also between Arab states and Iran. His withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal allowed Iran to enrich much more uranium, putting it within far less than a year of having the fissile materials required to build a nuclear weapon. Saudi Arabia is likewise moving towards nuclear weapons, as is Turkey. We face the real prospect of a nuclear arms race among the three most powerful countries in the Middle East, unleashed by a President who thought he could bring the Iranians to heel with sanctions. That effort has failed.
We could review a few more non-contributions to peace in the Middle East:
- arms sold to both the Emirates and Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen,
- withdrawal of US troops from eastern Syria that undermined America’s Kurdish allies,
- greenlighting of Turkey’s expansion across its southern border to create a buffer zone in northern Syria,
- support for the most brutal military dictatorship Egypt has ever seen,
- flirting with would-be autocrat General Haftar in Libya and providing only erratic rhetorical support to the internationally recognized government.
President Trump’s best bid for contributing to peace is in Afghanistan, which I suppose is “greater” Middle East. Unable to defeat the Taliban, the Trump Administration gave Special Envoy Khalilzad the job of getting the US out. He reached an agreement with the Taliban for US withdrawal as well as a commitment to intra-Afghan talks between the Taliban and the Kabul government. Trump may well boast about the US withdrawal, but he has to be careful not to draw attention to the fact that it is only vaguely conditions-based and constitutes a retreat from America’s longest war without anything like victory. Zal has made lemonade from lemons, but there is not much sweetener available and the intra-Afghan talks, as well as the fighting, are likely to go on for a long time.
President Obama left the Middle East in bad shape. President Trump has managed to make things worse. As of a year ago, he had actually increased the number of US troops deployed in the region. It is certainly arguable that the former didn’t deserve the Nobel Prize he got. The latter would deserve it far less. Of course the Norwegian prize committee knows that and won’t be tempted. Trump’s egotistical neediness to match the achievements of the black president is pitiful, not praiseworthy.
*PS: the same goes for Bahrain.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
20 Years of Backward Progress
In July of 2000, Israelis and Palestinans met at Camp David. Their goal was to negotiate a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Predictably, the negotiations failed to produce a settlement. Twenty years later, on June 21, 2020, the Carnegie Endowment convened a panel to evaluate the Camp David Summit’s legacy and determine what the future holds for U.S.-mediated negotiations. Speakers and their affiliations are listed below.
Aaron David Miller: Senior Fellow, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Shlomo Ben Ami: Former Foreign Minister of Israel
Nabil Shaath: Former Foreign Minister of Palestine
Tamara Cofman Wittes: Senior Fellow, Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution
Where Did It All Go Wrong?
The panelists began by debating the summit’s legacy. Miller was quick to deem the negotiation a failure, as it obviously did not end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In his view, Ehud Barak’s expectations were too high and Yasser Arafat was never genuinely interested in the negotiations.
Ben Ami cast doubt on Miller’s prescriptions. The former Foreign Minister argued that, even in the absence of a negotiated settlement, the Camp David Summit was a crucial step in the peace process. It emphasized the importance of multilateralism and equity in the negotiating process, and it notably provided a framework for the Clinton Peace Parameters. The Clinton Peace Parameters, in turn, served as the basis for Ehud Olmert’s famous 2008 peace offer.
A Bleak Present (& Equally Bleak Future)
Twenty years later, however, Ben Ami lamented that “the two state solution has never been so far.” By his own admission, the peace camp in Israel is dwindling, and the electorate has shifted farther right. Against this backdrop, and under the direction of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli government expanded its West Bank settlements, doggedly avoided negotiations, and largely ignored the Palestinian question. The sincerity of Israel’s commitment to a two state solution is doubtful at best. Shaath, for one, believes that it is impossible to earnestly support a two-state solution while expanding settlements and threatening annexation. In brief, neither side feels confident that the other is a true partner for peace.
According to Cofman Wittes, the collapse of the Oslo Process is at least partially responsible for this phenomenon. Oslo’s gradualism, intended to bolster prospects for coexistence, actually undermined them. Over time, Palestinians grew suspicious and began to wonder whether gradualism was simply an excuse for Israeli inaction.
In the post-Oslo and Camp David world, Cofman Wittes believes that the United States must drastically alter its approach to mediation. Rather than force policies and summits upon the Israelis and Palestinians, whom she believes are not prepared to negotiate, the US must re-enter the pre-negotiation phase. Only after the United States understands each side’s position, its goals and red lines, can it even attempt to resolve the conflict. It is also worth noting that Cofman Wittes and Shaath each recommended that future negotiations involve multiple regional and international stakeholders.
Cofman Wittes’ suggestions unlikely to change the current administration’s course, which seems intent on destroying the United States’ credibility as a mediator. To quote veteran American diplomat Aaron David Miller, “no one has ever lost money betting against success in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.”
To watch the event in full, click here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Two issues portend
Yesterday, I welcomed the UAE/Israel normalization of relations. I have no regrets about that.
But, as in all announcements of agreements still to be formally drafted and signed, there are question marks:
- Where will the UAE Embassy be located?
- Will Israel’s territory be defined, either explicitly or implicitly, in the formal agreements?
Israel says Jerusalem is its capital, and the Trump Administration moved the US Embassy there from Tel Aviv. If the UAE follows suit, that would be bigger news than the normalization of relations. I doubt Abu Dhabi will do that, but Israel will likely insist. How will that circle be squared?
The official statement says Israel is suspending its annexation plans, not ending them. This implies that it can in the future again threaten annexation and even do it, or back off again in exchange for another Arab country normalizing relations.
I would expect the UAE to try to avoid that by incorporating somewhere in the many agreements to be signed implicit or explicit reference to Israel’s 1967 borders, which have been the widely accepted basis for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. That way the UAE could claim that it has not departed in principle from support for the Palestinians and the Arab Peace Initiative, which foresaw normalizing relations with Israel once the territorial issue with Palestine was resolved.
These are two of the final status issues that have to be solved before the Israel/Palestine conflict can be considered settled: the status of Jerusalem and the extent of Israel’s sovereign territory. They are among the issues that have stymied peace efforts in the past. It will be difficult to avoid them entirely in establishing normal relations between the UAE and Israel. How they are resolved could have a big impact on prospects for peace in the future.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Good but…
The deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates on its face does good things. It prevents Israeli annexation of a big piece of the West Bank and will establish normal diplomatic relations and other ties between the two countries. Hard to object to any of that.
But in diplomacy the devil is in the details, especially the details of implementation. There are a lot of still unanswered questions. Is the bar on annexation permanent, or are the Israelis going to be able to threaten it over and over again in order to gain recognition by Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and maybe Qatar?* Or will those countries raise the ante and get further concessions for Palestinian interests in return for normalization?
On implementation, skepticism is in order. Egypt and Jordan have normal diplomatic relations with Israel, but their peace is not a uniformly warm one. Security cooperation is embraced, but economic and commercial relations are far from maximized. Even travel among the three countries presents serious bureaucratic barriers, not to mention the cultural inhibitions against Arabs going to Israel (and Israel’s Jews going to Arab countries).
There are three strong factors favoring UAE/Israel rapprochement.
First is Israeli security assistance. The UAE is concerned about homegrown Islamists, especially those affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. You only need sit for an hour in a business class lounge in Riyadh or Dubai to meet Israeli males with square jaws and muscular physiques, along with a group of nerds. When I asked one in Riyadh why there were so many Israelis in the lounge, he replied with an icy smile, “If I told you I would have to kill you.” My impression is that Israel has bought a lot of good will in the Gulf by helping its autocratic regimes to ensure that nothing like the Arab Spring can succeed there.
Second is a lack of bad blood at the personal level. While the UAE has recognized and support Palestine, there is no decades-long history of war with Israel and subsequent occupation, as there was with Jordan and Egypt. Nor is there a history of Jews being expelled from the Emirates, so far as I can tell. There has been a synagogue in Dubai for decades that is now officially recognized. Ordinary Emiratis may not like the deal, but mass dissent inside the UAE is unlikely, as both its citizens and non-citizens are under tight control. Your traffic ticket arrives by text message within minutes of a violation. Any negative reaction in the “Arab street” will not be in Dubai or Abu Dhabi.
Third is the common enemy: Iran. The Israelis will no doubt want and get intelligence and military cooperation with the UAE, which is conveniently located just on the other side of the Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. Israel will presumably be glad to provide missile defense and other high tech weaponry. The UAE was never going to be able to stand aside if war happens between Iran and Israel, so it makes sense for Abu Dhabi to get what it can to defend itself, especially after the Iranian attacks on its tankers in 2019.
The Palestinians are objecting vigorously to the UAE/Israel deal, because it rewards Israel for not doing something it should never have threatened to do and gains nothing substantial for Palestine. But the Arab world has mostly been ignoring the Palestinians lately. Certainly the Trump Administration will be uninterested in their complaints. The Palestinians will need to hope that the next Arab country to recognize Israel drives a harder bargain.
*PS: I failed to notice yesterday when drafting this that the Israelis have only suspended their annexation, which means they will try to sell that concession again to the next Arab country wanting to establish normal relations.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Biden will have his hands full
Time for a summer update on President Trump’s diplomatic initiatives, more or less in his priority order:
- Trade with China: importing less than half of what is called for in the “first phase” agreement.
- Re-initiating nuclear talks with Iran: Trump said more than a year ago he would talk with no pre-conditions. Tehran won’t, despite “maximum pressure.” Iran wants sanctions eased first.
- Getting rid of North Korea’s nuclear weapons: Kim Jong-un has in effect said “no.”
- Ending the war in Afghanistan: The withdrawal is proceeding, but progress in intra-Afghan talks is minimal.
- Removal of Venezuelan President Maduro: He has weathered the challenge and remains firmly in power.
- South China Sea: The US has rejected China’s sovereignty claim but is doing nothing about its military outposts.
- Helping Ukraine force the Russians out of Donbas: The Administration has provided lethal weapons to no avail.
- Reducing Saudi oil production to jack up world prices: Saudi production is down, but world prices are still in a trough.
- Initiating a democratic transition in Syria: Congress has beefed up sanctions, but Trump can’t even begin to get Assad out.
- “Deal of the century”: Not going anywhere but into the shredder. Even Israeli annexation of part of the West Bank is blocked.
This skips a lot. For example:
- the President telling Chinese President Xi that it was fine to put (Muslim) Uighurs into concentration camps,
- withdrawing from the Paris Climate accord, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and several favorable arms control agreements with Russia,
- moving US troops out of Germany to the delight of Moscow,
- failing to counter Russian bounties for Taliban who kill US soldiers in Afghanistan,
- saying the right things about Hong Kong and withdrawing its trade preferences, but with not discernible impact,
- not responding to foreign initiatives to undermine the US elections, and
- withdrawing from the World Health Organization in the midst of a pandemic.
American foreign policy has rarely been so ineffectual, never mind whether the priorities are right. The Administration doesn’t think past its own next move. The President is incapable of it and won’t let others do it for him. He behaves as if the adversary has no options. Much of what the Administration does is for show, without considering however how most of the rest of the world sees the situation. The only customers for this foreign policy are the domestic audience of China hawks, Russia doves, oil and coal producers, and evangelical Christians, along with President Putin, Prime Minister Netanyahu and a few other would-be autocrats around the world.
Getting out of the foreign policy hole Trump has dug will be a big challenge. President Biden, if there ever is one, will have his hands full even if he pays attention only to the first three of the items above. Let’s hope he can somehow save us from the consequences of four dreadful years.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks | July 20-26, 2020
Notice: Due to recent public health concerns, upcoming events are only available via live stream.
- Russian Influence Activities in Europe | July 20, 2020 | 12:00 PM- 12:45 PM | CSIS | Register Here
Please join CSIS for a conversation on Russia’s influence activities in the UK, Europe, and Europe’s southern neighborhood featuring Dame Karen Pierce DCMG, British Ambassador to the United States, and Luke Harding, foreign correspondent and investigative journalist for The Guardian, on the occasion of a newly released CSIS report on Russian and Chinese influence activities in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Introduced by Heather A. Conley, Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic, and moderated by Rachel Ellehuus, CSIS Europe Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, this conversation will examine the objectives and tactics behind Russia’s influence activities in the UK, Europe, and beyond; discuss the activities which were and were not considered successful; and discuss steps that the United Kingdom has taken to be more resilient and less susceptible to Russian efforts at home and abroad.
Speakers:
Dame Karen Pierce DCMG: British Ambassador to the United States
Luke Harding: Foreign Correspondent, The Guardian
Rachel Ellehuus: Deputy Director, Europe Program
Heather A. Conley: Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic; and Director, Europe Program
- Sino-Indian Escalation: Blip or Lasting Strategic Shift? | July 21, 2020 | 10:30 AM – 11:30 AM | United States Institute of Peace |Register Here
Last month, Chinese and Indian troops came to blows in their deadliest border incident since 1967, culminating on June 15 with the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese troops. The Indian and Chinese governments have remained largely silent on exactly what happened along the disputed boundary. The two countries appear to have stabilized the situation by starting a disengagement process, but unlike prior dustups, this unexpected and deadly turn could portend a lasting and significant strategic shift.
Join USIP for an expert panel on the Sino-Indian border clash and its implications for regional and global security. The discussion will examine whether this conflict signals an emboldened shift in China’s posture toward disputed borders elsewhere, how this rivalry affects existing India-Pakistan tensions and other border disputes, and what the implications are for the United States and its allies as they push back on perceived Chinese aggression.
Speakers:
Tanvi Madan: Senior Fellow, Project on International Order and Strategy and Director of the India Project, Brookings Institution
M. Taylor Fravel: Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science and Director of the Security Studies Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
Vikram J. Singh: Senior Advisor, Asia Center, U.S. Institute of Peace
Jacob Stokes (Moderator): Senior Policy Analyst, China Program, Asia Center, U.S. Institute of Peace
- One State, Two States, or None At All: Where Do Israelis and Palestinians Go From Here? | July 21, 2020 | 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | Register Here
As Israelis and Palestinians confront the future, prospects for serious negotiations, or even a conflict-ending solution, look particularly grim. The prospects of a negotiated two-state solution are dwindling or already dead; the possibility of a bi-national state shimmers out in the distance like a desert mirage; and both the Trump peace plan and possible Israeli annexation offer either continued impasse or escalation.
Where do Israelis and Palestinians go from here? Join us as three veteran observers and practitioners of Israeli-Palestinian affairs assess the prospects for peace and the road ahead.
Speakers:
Shlomo Ben Ami: former foreign minister of Israel.
Nadeel Shaath: foreign minister of Palestine from 2003 to 2005, the former minister of Planning and International Cooperation, and a former member of Fateh Central Committee.
Tamara Cofman Wittes: senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, where she focuses on U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Aaron David Miller: senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, focusing on U.S. foreign policy.
- The Next Era of US-Pacific Islands Engagement | July 22, 2020 | 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM | United States Institute of Peace | Register Here
In this Pacific Century, the United States is a Pacific nation that for three generations has anchored peace in this region of the world. The Pacific Islands include 24 jurisdictions ranging from independent states, to states linked to the United States and others through free association compacts, to territories and dependencies stretching throughout Polynesia, Micronesia, and Melanesia—from Rapa Nui to Palau, from Hawai’i to New Caledonia. As the world turns its attention to the Pacific Islands, these countries are coalescing around a shared regional identity and bringing their economic, political, and security concerns to the global stage.
How do the United States and our allies and partners continue longstanding mutual interests and values with the Pacific Islands in the face of accelerating development needs and challenges to regional peace and security, sovereignty, trade and freedom of navigation, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law?
Join USIP as we host two co-founders of the bipartisan Congressional Pacific Islands Caucus for a discussion that outlines these challenges and opportunities, as well as their proposals to coordinate the next era of the United States’ engagement in the Pacific.
Speakers:
Rep. Ed Case: U.S. Representative from Hawaii
Rep. Ted Yoho: U.S. Representative from Florida
The Honorable Nancy Lindborg: (Moderator): President, U.S. Institute of Peace
- US Policy Towards Syria after the Caesar Act | July 22, 2020 | 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM | Arab Center DC | Register Here
This webinar focuses on the substance and ramifications of the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, which was passed by both chambers of the US Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2019. It went into effect on June 17, 2020. The discussion will provide details on the sanctions mandated by the act, an update on the implementation and targets of these sanctions, and the ensuing political and regional dynamics, including Russia’s reaction. The speakers will also address the next steps for the United States following the July 9, 2020 condemnation of Syria’s air force by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Speakers:
Joel D. Rayburn: Deputy Assistant Secretary for Levant Affairs and Special Envoy for Syria, US Department of State
Radwan Ziadeh: Senior Fellow, Arab Center Washington DC
Reema Abuhamdieh (Moderator): Presenter and Reporter, Al Araby Television Network
- Toward a Green Recovery in the Gulf States | July 23, 2020 | 9:30 AM – 10:30 AM | Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington| Register Here
As the Gulf Arab countries look to recover from the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, climate-related challenges loom large over their economic revival plans. While urgent in their own right, climate-related challenges are a slower moving threat compared to the immediacy of a global pandemic; nevertheless, the economic consequences of, and solutions to, both problems present many parallels. As with climate change, the coronavirus crisis further emphasizes the importance of regional economic diversification programs aimed at reducing oil dependence and highlights lower carbon, technology, and human capital-intensive businesses as the sectors that are most sustainable and resilient to economic shocks.
Is this a window of opportunity for Gulf leaders to drive diversification policies further and faster? Will shifts in consumer and industrial behaviors reorient economic policy toward sustainable development goals? Couldaccelerating investment in renewable energy underpin economic recovery, or will rising public debt, combined with significant capital outflows and reduced exports, make financing green investments a challenge?
Speakers:
Samantha Gross: Fellow, Foreign Policy, Energy Security and Climate Initiative, Brookings Institution
Aisha Al-Sarihi: Non-Resident Fellow, AGSIW
Rabia Ferroukhi: Director, Knowledge, Policy and Finance Centre, International Renewable Energy Agency
Mari Luomi: Independent Expert, Sustainable Energy and Climate Policy
Grzegorz Peszko: Economist, World Bank
- Online Event: A Conversation with Dr. Anthony Fauci | July 24, 2020 | 1:30 PM – 2:00 PM | CSIS | Watch Event Here
Please join the CSIS Global Health Policy Center on Friday, July 24 from 1:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. EDT for a conversation with Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health and member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force on Covid-19 in the United States. The United States is in the midst of a worsening crisis, with Covid-19 cases and deaths increasing in the Sun Belt, the West, and many other parts of the United States. This begs the question: what is the strategy for ensuring that the outbreak does not spiral out of control in the United States? How can the United States strengthen the basic public health capacities – test, trace, and isolate – needed to slow the spread? What federal, state, and local actions may be necessary to protect the American people and safely reopen businesses, schools, and sporting events?
In this CSIS Commission on Strengthening America’s Health Security event, J. Stephen Morrison, Senior Vice President and Director of the CSIS Global Health Policy Center, will discuss these difficult questions with Dr. Anthony Fauci. They will also discuss the development of a safe and effective Covid-19 vaccine, including the status and promise of Operation Warp Speed.`
Speakers:
Anthony Fauci: Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health and a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force
J. Stephen Morrison: Senior Vice President and Director, Global Health Policy Center
RSS - Posts
