By Eitan Dangot
The decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to unveil his plan for an Israeli – Palestinian peace arrangement is a bold break from the past. It marks a new starting position that departs from previous proposals based on failed assumptions and better reflects the changing reality of the Middle East.
The Administration’s plan has been crystallized over the past several years and is based on layers of meetings and consultations. It should be heard out in full, and its central principles should be reviewed and digested before mounting any rapid response. Once the dust settles from the plan’s unveiling, its influence will reverberate into the future.
As the leading superpower, the U.S. has played the central role in all historical negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. The Trump Administration has openly exhibited friendship towards the State of Israel and has adopted new working assumptions towards Israel's conflict with the Palestinians.
The Palestinian Authority and radical Palestinian movements in Gaza have already rejected the Trump Administration’s plan, claiming the U.S. is not an objective broker. However, the question of who determines whether a broker is objective remains open. In the past, American administrations formulated proposals that were uncomfortable for Israel, however that did not stop the dialogue that followed in their wake.
The unveiling of the Trump Administration’s plan comes at a strategic junction in the region. Israel is about to hold its third elections, while the era of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas comes to an end. Furthermore, Hamas – an extremist movement that rejects Israel's existence – is willing to align itself with a ceasefire in the South.
The moderate Sunni Arab bloc’s primary objective is to deal with the Iranian-led fundamentalist axis, which seeks instability and bloodshed in the Middle East. Another priority is their battle against radical Sunni movements, which also seek to disrupt the region.
Israel and the pragmatic Sunni states agree that the highest regional priority is dealing with Iranian entrenchment efforts.
In the Mediterranean arena, Israel has evolved into a major energy player, together with Egypt, and possibly Cyprus. This development holds the promise of joint interests and stability between Israel and some of its neighbors.
In this rapidly changing landscape, the Palestinian issue has dropped to the bottom of the agenda. This is also true in the West.
At the same time, stabilizing forces have developed within the West Bank. Specifically, economic growth over the last decade has resulted in 2.5 million Palestinians coming to value their economic standing – compared to the situation in neighboring lands – thus deterring participation in recent escalations.
NEW WORKING ASSUMPTIONS
According to reports, the Trump Administration’s plan recognizes that the Jordan Valley must be preserved as Israel's eastern border. Accordingly, it should be annexed and established as part of Israeli sovereignty. This proposal puts an end to the vague acrobatics of old, which included plans to lease the area to Israel.
The Trump Administration’s plan also recognizes Jerusalem as Israel's full capital, with Palestinian representation in neighborhoods bordering the city.
Israeli sovereignty over half a million Israeli citizens living in the West Bank is recognized in the plan, allowing for the annexation of these considerable blocs.
The plan establishes Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank, offering territorial land swaps between north and south, and gives the Palestinians a high percentage of control over a central area – though less than that of previous proposals.
The Trump Administration’s plan aims to neutralize the root of the conflict; the Palestinian claim to a right of return. The end stage of the plan seeks the establishment of a Palestinian state that can function with civilian and economic independence, but no military independence that would threaten the security of Israeli civilians. The IDF would maintain aerial and ground-based freedom of movement, including the ability to deliver intelligence alerts over threats developing from the east.
These are the principles that have guided past Israeli governments, irrespective of whether they were led by Labor or Likud.
The Trump Administration’s plan represents a new opening position that gives Israel a real opportunity to launch a dialogue.
There is no doubt that Palestinian Authority President Abbas will reject Trump’s plan – and any other – since he refuses to be an Arab leader whose legacy is giving up on the right of return.
Nevertheless, any future negotiations will still have a new starting position as a result of Trump’s plan, and one that reflects recent changes in the region. The idea of restarting discussions based on proposals raised during President Obama's second term is a non-starter.
The Trump Administration’s plan does carry certain risks of escalating tensions in the region. Specifically, the Palestinian Authority will likely respond by threatening to breach fundamental Oslo principles, such as security and civilian coordination with Israel. By doing so, the Palestinian Authority risks losing infrastructure and preserving Fatah's rule in the West Bank, which is permanently under threat by Hamas and other extreme organizations. Hence, these tensions are likely to be contained and the potential of a Third Intifada erupting appears distant.
Jordan may respond with dramatic steps of its own. The Hashemite Kingdom rules a population that is more than 50 percent Palestinian. The Kingdom could attempt to appease this population by returning its ambassador or freezing its peace treaty with Israel.
Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad can be expected to respond by accelerating attempts to conduct terror attacks and threatening the West Bank's stability. Furthermore, Hamas will likely attempt to position itself as the true leader of the PLO, while exporting terrorism to the West Bank from Gaza.
Nonetheless, these short-term risks do not outweigh the strategic value of the Trump Administration’s new peace plan.Edited By Eden Ellis