Dissecting Trump’s West Asia Peace Plan

Barely days after the 75^th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, President Trump invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his political contender Benny Gantz to unveil a peace plan for West Asia. Jared Kushner, son-in-law of Trump, in-charge of West Asia affairs is the architect of the plan titled as “Vision for Peace, Prosperity and a Brighter Future”.

Unlike the earlier contingent peace plans which were rolled out to address pertinent flareup of tensions, the hostilities between Israel and Palestine in past one year have been subdued. The timing is the suspect. President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu are seeking political gains. With no major foreign policy victory thus far, Trump who is seeking a re-election has invested more hopes on this plan. Similarly, Netanyahu having surrendered immunity and likely to face indictment in three bribery charges gearing up for uphill task of third round of elections on March 2^nd is keen on milking this proposal. Notwithstanding its immense strategic significance, the proposal is reckoned by strategists as a political elixir for both the leaders set to face crucial public verdict.

Political ambitious have virtually shadowed the strategic implications as of now. President Trump, who held wide-ranging talks with Israeli leaders didn’t consult Palestinians before unveiling the plan. Nor did he invite any Palestinian representative to White House while making the plan public. His partisan approach has inadvertently fuelled the popular perception of the deal being overtly Pro-Israeli.

Since 1990, America has been making attempts to mediate between Israel and Palestine. Trump is the fourth American leader after Bill Clinton, Bush and Obama to put forth a peace plan. Plans of Trump’s predecessors invariably hit a roadblock and failed to bring any change in the status quo which has been violence. Palestine overwhelmingly rejected Trump’s two-state solution and recognition of Israeli sovereignty over Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Jordan Valley. Stating that, “All our rights are not for sale and are not for bargain”, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called the plan a conspiracy. He rejected the idea of Palestinian state without Jerusalem. Interestingly, ambassadors from UAE, Oman and Bahrain who attended the unveiling ceremony, tacitly supported Tump’s efforts. Post announcement, Saudi Arabia reiterated “support for all efforts aimed at reaching a just and comprehensive resolution to the Palestinian cause”. Jordan believed that an independent Palestinian state based on pre-1967 boundaries can alone bring peace. UK spoke encouragingly and asked Palestine to genuinely consider the possibility of exploring all options through negotiations. while Germany raised some questions, EU sought to discuss the plan with its members. Palestinian Authority, Turkey, Iran and Yemen opposed plan while Netanyahu called Trump’s plan, “deal of the century” and Israel will not “miss this opportunity”.

As a supporter of Palestinian cause, India stated, “We urge both the parties to engage with each other, including on the recent proposals put forward by the US and find an acceptable two-state solution for peaceful coexistence”.

The proposal claims to double the Palestinian territory. Palestine will get possession of Gaza strip controlled by Hamas. Jerusalem in its entirety will be the capital of Israel which has to work with Jordan to maintain status quo governing holy sites of the place. Israel will stand to control the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Jordan Valley. It imposes a four-year construction freeze on Israel in areas currently held by Palestine. A governorate at the outskirts of Eastern Jerusalem together with adjoining village Abu Dis to become the capital of state of Palestine. It can be named as Al-Quds which roughly translates to “Holy City”. The new plan proposes to connect the scattered regions around Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza strip through a network of roads, bridges and tunnels. Israel would control the air space and maintain the state borders. Palestinian Refugees who were displaced during the 1948 will stand to lose their right of return. Entire plan is will subject to implementation after Hamas and other groups give up arms. After the state of Palestine becomes demilitarised and the necessary precondition of disbanding of arms is maintained, Palestinian Authority (PA) will receive the promised $50 billion investment from the US over a period of 10 years. Israel will have to transfer certain regions in the Northern triangle, Negev Desert dominated by Palestinians.

As expected, the PA, Iran, Turkey vehemently disapproved Trump’s plan. Echoing the chorus, former US President, Jimmy Carter denounced Trump’s peace plan stating that it violates international law, undermines self-determination of Palestine and approved of Israel’s annexation of occupied territories by force. 

Trump’s comprehensive plan has tried to address several aspects. But the PA outrightly refused to even consider the plan. After Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and plans of shifting embassy to Jerusalem in 2017, PA severed all ties with America. American has withdrawn its financial assistance to PA and UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) which serves the Palestine Refugees in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem in September 2018 and USAID funding to projects in Palestine territories in February 2019. America has closed PLO office in Washington in 2018. PA’s relations with America hit rock bottom after Trump signed an order recognising Israel’s annexation of Golan Heights in March 2019. Reversing decades of American foreign policy November 2019, Mike Pompeo announced that Israeli settlements in West Bank don’t violate international law. This rattled the PA and irrevocably damaged its ties with Trump administration. In the light of the Trump’s plan, Palestine snapped all ties with US and Israel including the security cooperation and joint policing of the regions in West Bank under Palestinian control. This might eventually trigger a massive upsurge of terrorism in the region.

Abbas called for urgent meeting of the foreign ministers of Arab League at Cairo. Contending that the plan fails to meet the aspirations of Palestinians, Arab League refused to cooperate with the US. Upon Palestine’s request, the 57-member body Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), second largest intergovernmental organisation after the UN, met on Monday and called on members “to not to engage with the US administration in implementing it (the plan) in any form”.  Even EU foreign policy chief, Joseph Borrell opined, “To build just and lasting peace, the unresolved final status issues must be decided through direct negotiations between both parties”. The plan is slated for a discussion at UNSC on Feb 11^th. Kushner is learnt to be briefing the UNSC ambassadors about the Vision ahead of the meet.

There are several practical difficulties in the implementation of Trump’s plan. Topmost among them has been the convoluted map of the proposed Palestine state which doesn’t have contiguous boundary. Scattered regions interspersed with the Israeli territory and littered randomly makes the task of securing sovereignty a formidable task. Numerous divisions of the geographical area would lead to crumbling of state with the eventual threat of the absorption of these smaller regions into the bigger territory. This will be an assault on the basic concept of the sovereignty of the envisioned State of Palestine. Trump’s plan proposes to connect these regions through network of bridges. But its practical feasibility among other aspects seems rather difficult underscoring the partisan nature of the plan.

But going by the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict, ever since Palestine refused the UN’s initial partition plan in 1947, it started losing more of its territory. After every major escalation, Palestine’s hold over its territory began to shrink. 1993 Oslo Accord offered an immense promise of resolving the longstanding hostilities between two parties including carving of a new Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Even then Palestine didn’t approvingly embrace the deal. Yizhatik Rabin’s assassination in 1995 impeded the peace process. Later Camp Davis talks negotiated by Bill Clinton in 2000 between Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat inched closed to deal. Indeed, the proposal included establishment of demilitarised Palestinian state over 92% region in West Bank, 100% West Bank, dismantling of Jewish settlements in West Bank, compensation for pre-1967 territorial losses, return of Palestinian refugees to future Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital and custodianship over the Temple Mount. Proposal offered massive financial aid towards rehabilitation of Palestinian refugees. But Arafat’s refused. This led to intifada, two decades of unrest and chaos in the region.

Israel and Egypt inked peace treaty and ended hostilities in 1979. Notably Egypt even became first Arab country to recognise Israel as a state. Similarly, Israel and Jordan clinched a landmark 1994 peace deal ending all conflicts. In 2000, Israel offered to sign treaty with Syria to return Golan Heights but the latter refused paving way for American administration endorsement of Israeli sovereignty last year.

Over the years, Israel has evolved into a stable democratic regime steadily enhancing its economic and diplomatic clout. Israel is no longer a pariah state. Arab states and Muslim countries are forthcoming in their approach towards Israel. On the other hand, vicious infighting, poor governance, repressive leadership of PA bereft of committed approach to fulfil the aspirations of Palestinians failed to make any significant progress. Cynical leadership of the PA and the Hamas controlling the Gaza never evinced any interest in dismantling the terrorist militia. Despite decades of hardships and hostilities PA refuses to comprehend the futility of protracted conflicts. Palestine statehood in no longer the top most priority of Arab World bogged down by security challenges. Israeli-Palestinian interminable conflict has destabilised the region and denied the people an opportunity to live in peace. Among the many devastating fall outs of the colonialism, this conflict stands out as the most intractable one. It has been close to a century and attempts are still on to resolve the conflict.

While Trump’s plan has abject implementation challenges, it attempts to offer a solution. Instead of completely jettisoning the effort with a curt dismissal, Palestine should use this opportunity to realise their dream of statehood. With an eternal “No” Palestine is denying peace a chance. Palestine believes that Israel, “has no right to exist, and seeks its demise”.  Their fervent refusals for a peace deal and rejection of legitimacy of Israel reiterates the same..