Trump reckless to play with a match on a powder keg
If United States President Donald Trump’s previous foreign policy moves have by and large been driven by putting “America first”, formally recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and planning to move the US embassy there would be best described as ill-advised, more accurately dangerously foolhardy. Whatever motivated the announcement, the potential consequences surely make it too costly to be put into action by anyone willing to listen to reason. Trump has received warnings from around the world of the dire consequences that will result from this.
Of course, it may be intended to shift public attention at home, if temporarily, away from the investigation which has now snared his former security advisor Michael Flynn. It is, of course, intended to please his backers. And the Israeli government, of course, applauds it. But what else?
President Trump has an understandable eagerness to accomplish something big. So after declaring past engagement with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea a “failure”, his administration has reportedly concluded “delaying the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has done nothing to achieve peace”, ignoring such recognition’s potential to put an end to that prospect.
Despite his proud confidence in himself as an exceptional dealmaker, and difference-maker, it is extremely dangerous for Trump to continue to assume that the knots of history are as simple to unravel as he seems to believe.
No country has its embassy in Jerusalem, for good reason. Admittedly, the idea of relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem was first proposed way before Trump began to play with it. The US Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995, requiring the relocation while pragmatically giving presidents the power to delay. It has been delayed all the way till today, and not on an idle whim.
Because of their shared awareness of the dire consequences that would result from doing otherwise, past administrations have demonstrated common prudence by signing waivers. The long-standing US policy has rightly been Jerusalem’s final status must be decided through negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians.
It is hard to see how changing that advances US national interests. Or how it will it further efforts to secure peace in the Middle East.
US officials have said that Trump will still sign the waiver until a new embassy building is completed, suggesting it might be intended as leverage for a deal, since completion can of course be indefinitely postponed.
But whatever his intentions, it is most likely he is opening a Pandora’s box of turmoil in the region that experience suggests will be felt worldwide.