Trump's statement about Jerusalem changes nothing

T E L AVIV ) US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once singled out Israel as a country whose foreign policy is actually domestic politics. But the same applies to the United States, especially when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

All the presidents of the United States, who try to solve this conflict, have faced serious obstacles that are truly insurmountable of domestic politics. With his final decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, Donald Trump has brought this tendency a level higher, even though the result may be more stagnation.

Trump's statement on Jerusalem is the recent manifestation of the president's efforts for internal legitimacy, which has made him almost obsessed with fulfilling his extreme campaign promises, including the withdrawal of or renegotiation of key international agreements: such as the Trans-Peace Partnership and the Paris climate agreement. Similarly, the decision on Jerusalem was intended to calm the Messianic dreams of its independent voters.

Trump's actions, however, have broader diplomatic consequences, which he seems unable to calculate. Understandably, Trump's statement has run into the ire of Palestinians, with President Mahmoud Abbas claiming that “from now on”, he will not accept “any role for the US in the peace process and has even called for the world to reconsider Israel's recognition.

Moreover, the anti-American powers -- Hezbollah, Iran, Russia and Turkey -- have exploited Trump's decision as an opportunity to increase their influence in the region at the expense of the US and its allies. They hope to be positioned as champions of a large Arab and Muslim cause, allegedly betrayed by the poor reaction of Israel's new Arab friends, especially Saudi Arabia.

This response will not help Palestinians more than the US will. Anger is not a strategy a lesson Palestinians have learned in the past. Abbas is apparently still waiting for the United Kingdom to apologise for Balfour's statement in 1917, the 100th anniversary of which Israel recently celebrated.

The fact is that despite having been demoralised by years of endless peace processes, Palestinian measures are not in “humor” for a third instance. And they blame their situation not only for the invaders but also for their unelected and completely unpopular leaders, who do not offer them a sense of orientation or attainable objectives.

The fighting rhetoric of Palestine's supporters in the Arab world has never done much for the Palestinian people. Trump's declaration to Jerusalem is not the last “beginning of Israel”, as Hasan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah promised. Hezbollah is simply trying to draw attention to his shameful war, in support of Bashar al-Assad's genocide regime in Syria.

Also, pledging to back “The Palestinian Islamic Resistance Forces, the defender of Hezbollah, Iran, is simply recycling a policy that has long followed that statement, with the aim of advancing regional hegemonist plans. And, in fact, although this action may have reinforced Iran's claim to be the true defender of Jerusalem and Palestine, the greatest benefits for Iran are likely to be emotional. After all, the Sunite Middle East... led by a Saudi Arabia, for which regional dominance represents a struggle for the survival of the regime... will not be led by the growing rain empire, especially if it means confrontation with Israel and the United States.

Palestine should also not expect much from Russia. President Vladimir Putin is realistic; he knows that following the call for Russia to take a leading role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would damage relations with both sides, without bringing them closer to a solution. Russia's call is not ʹ and has never been that of a peacemaker.

So in many ways, Trump's statement about Jerusalem will not change much. As Palestinians and their friends can understand in the international community after the smoke is removed, it does not rule out dividing the city into two capitals as part of a peace agreement, much less.  guarantee Israel's sovereignty in all of Jerusalem, as its eternal city “

In fact, it is an assumed fantasy, as Israeli Prime Minister Benyam Netanyahu does, that Trump's support is the key to making Palestinians and their Arab and Muslim supporters accept Israeli-Hebrew rule over a city that is so important to both sides. Even Trump himself acknowledged the boundaries of Israel's sovereignty in Jerusalem and confirmed his commitment to the status quos concerning the sacred places of eastern Jerusalem.

Moreover, the Arab leaders' cautious reaction should not be interpreted as an excuse for Netanyahu's assumption that his newly formed allies in Saudi Arabia and Egypt could force Palestinians to a US-mediated peace agreement, which would not meet the fundamental demands of their national narrator.

However, the days of Netaniah's expansionist government are numbered. The declaration of Jerusalem cannot save the current Netaniah coalition government from massive corruption scandals and internal conflicts. Not even a peace plan with Israel, run by Trump (assisting that his declaration does not rule him out fully) can do so.

Netanyahu's right-wing coalition is simply not a partner for a historic agreement, for Jerusalem or any other element of the dispute. The only way forward is for Israel to produce a new, most central coalition, while Palestinians adopt a more cautious and strategic approach. In that case, Trump's statement on Jerusalem would not rule out a solution according to the peace parameters put forward by Bill Clinton. And, indeed, when I led the Israeli negotiating team nearly two decades ago, both sides accepted the idea of Jerusalem being divided, though with flexible boundaries, along ethnic lines.

To improve the chances of success, America's monopoly in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process must end. Instead, negotiations should be handled more like those that produced Iran's nuclear agreement in 2015, with a group of countries in this case, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (Kina, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States), plus Germany working together to achieve results