President Donald Trump has done it again. His decision to recognise Jerusalem not only as the capital of Israel but also to relocate the US Embassy there, has been interpreted as USA acting in contravention of all existing international legal resolutions.
Speaking from the White House's Diplomatic Reception Room, Donald Trump stated "Today, we finally acknowledge the obvious: that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. This is nothing more or less than recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do." Trump added "After more than two decades of waivers; we are no closer to a lasting peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. It would as such be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result". Trump went on to claim that his decision was designed to advance the peace process and that it did not in any way reflect "a departure from US's strong commitment to facilitate a lasting peace agreement" or with regard to US policy on the final boundaries of future Israeli and Palestinian states.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's response, as expected, was one of happiness. He stated that "The President's decision is an important step towards peace, for there is no peace that doesn't include Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel".
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, on the other hand, has condemned and rejected Trump's decision. Speaking in a televised address, the Palestinian leader said the move will aid extremist organisations to wage holy wars. "These procedures will help the extremist organisations to wage a religious war that would harm the entire region which at this time is going through critical moments, " he warned. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat observed that Trump's decision had "disqualified the United States of America to play any role in any peace process".
Trump's decision of December 06 has upended seven decades of US foreign policy that has resisted recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital before the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved.
The ramifications of Trump's decision has over the past week reverberated through Israel, the West Bank, the Middle East, the EU, all Muslim countries who are members of the OIC and also within the United Nations.
Trump's decision on Jerusalem has reportedly created divisions among the President's top advisers. Defence Secretary James Mattis, CIA Director Mike Pompeo and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson privately argued against unsettling the status quo. As opposed to this Vice President Mike Pence, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley and US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman pushed in favour of the move. The President's top officials overseeing the US push for Israeli-Palestinian peace -- son-in-law Jared Kushner and special envoy Jason Greenblatt are reported to have supported recognising Jerusalem as the capital, but at the same time urged Trump to delay a move on the Embassy.
THE move by Trump triggered almost simultaneous responses from the Arab League, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperaation (OIC).
The UNSC in an emergency meeting, held on December 08, squarely condemned Trump's unilateral decision. Below is a synopsis of observations made in the UNSC:
- Nickolay Mladenov, the UN's Special Coordinator for the Middle East peace process, underlined the sensitivity of the situation by pointing out that "The United Nations has repeatedly declared that any unilateral decision that seeks to alter the character and status of Jerusalem or that may alter these long-standing principles could seriously undermine current peace efforts and may have repercussions across the region."
- Riyad Mansour, the Ambassador and Permanent Observer of Palestine at the UN, said the Trump administration has not only violated "Jerusalem's legal, political and historic status and the Palestinian peoples' rights and legitimate national aspirations" but was also likely to heighten tensions and risks that might lead to the complete destabilisation of this volatile situation."
- Danny Danon, Israel's ambassador to the UN, took a decidedly different tone, saying Trump's decision "marks a milestone for Israel, for peace and for the world". He also observed that "The United States has the courage and true understanding of justice to officially state what has always been known: that Jerusalem has and always will be the capital of Israel."
- Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to the UN, roundly rejected the criticism from other countries at the meeting and noted that it was "simple common sense that foreign embassies be located" in Jerusalem, which is home to Israel's Parliament, several government ministries, and its President and Prime Minister. The Ambassador probably felt that the best form of defence was attack.
- Sima Bahous, Jordan's Representative to the UN, "rejected" the US decision as a violation of international law and also observed that the decision may exacerbate tension, provoke strong emotions and lead to confrontations between people of different religions in the city. Amr Abdellatif Aboulatta, Egypt's UN Ambassador, said that Egypt "denounces" the US decision on Jerusalem as a violation of international legitimacy.
- Matthew Rycroft, the UK's UN Ambassador, said that his country had no plans to move the British Embassy from Tel Aviv . He also observed that Jerusalem should ultimately be the shared capital of the Israeli and Palestinian states, and that its status must come out of a negotiated settlement between both parties.
- Francois Delattre, French Ambassador to the UN, reflected the views of President Macron and pointed out that the status of Jerusalem must be determined after a negotiated settlement and "France recognises no sovereignty over Jerusalem".
- Olof Skoog, Sweden's UN Ambassador, pointed out that Trump's declaration "goes against the plea of many friends of the US and Israel and does not affect the position of Sweden, the European Union or the wider international community" on the status of Jerusalem.
- Russian Ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya observed that international law and UN resolutions must serve as the basis of a settlement to the long-standing conflict.
- Koro Bessho, Japan's UN Ambassador also underlined that Japan believed in a two-state solution to the conflict based on international law and UN resolutions.
Such opposition in the UNSC subsequently persuaded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to undertake a visit to Brussels on December 11 to urge the European Union (EU) to follow US President Donald Trump's lead and recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital. This was the first visit to the EU by an Israeli Premier in 22 years. EU foreign policy Chief Federica Mogherini welcomed Netanyahu but underlined that the bloc would continue to recognise the "international consensus" on Jerusalem. Earlier, the same message was passed on to Netanyahu by the French President when he stopped over in Paris on his way to Brussels. Mogherini repeated the EU's commitment to a two-state solution and that it was in Israel's interest to find a sustainable solution to its conflict with the Palestinians. The EU, she said, would also step up its peace efforts and would hold talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas next month. Others in the EU have also stressed that the EU considers that the lands Israel has occupied since the 1967 war, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, are not part of the internationally recognised borders of Israel.
Meanwhile, France's Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian has urged Washington to come forward with peace plans. If the Americans are not forthcoming with their initiative, he said, the European Union will have to take the initiative.
Thus, it is clear that almost all the countries in the world feel that the US should not pursue its Jerusalem plans with haste but move more carefully. The last thing the Middle East needs is more complexity, greater violation of human rights, excuse for more violence and the growth of terrorism.
The writer, a former Ambassador, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance.
