The Problems with US’ Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital
Consistent with his electoral promise ‘to look at the world’s challenges with open eyes and fresh thinking,’ as well as not ‘solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past,’ because ‘old challenges demand new approaches,’ President Donald Trump announced the US government’s recognition of Jerusalem as the official capital of the State of Israel on Wednesday, December 6, 2017. The recognition not only put an end to the US 70-year old policy on TelAviv as the political capital of Israel, but also unnecessarily subjects the good people ofAmerica to greater insecurity and hostility. True, the recognition can also be considered as a part fulfilment of the campaign promises of Donald Trump, even if it is a recognition that has the potential to greatly undermine US global interests.
And true enough, the recognition reminds of Professor Jean Baptiste Duroselle of the University of Paris, Sorbonne, who theorised that ‘ tout empire périra (every empire shall perish). Every empire shall perish is acceptable a theory, especially if we admit that whatever has a beginning must also have its end. The issue, however, is the silence over the manner of bringing the empire to an end. This is precisely why the US recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel appears to be a pointer to an end of US greatness in global leadership affairs.
The way Donald Trump is governing the United States appears to be largely driven by offensive-defensive strategy that first unnecessarily antagonises without due regard for possible hostile reactive measures against US citizens. The recognition cannot but create political bile and problems of monumental proportion that the Donald Trump administration may not be able to control in the near future.
It is important to note that the immediate implication may not simply be the tension or insecurity of life and property to be created by anti-American recognition. This is because the recognition is not consistent with social fairness and justice, international law, quest for peace and security in the Middle East. Donald Trump’s recognition speech is hostile to peace-making in the region. US mediation efforts in the Israelo-Arab conflict over the years have also failed because they were fraught with dishonesty of purpose. The basic principle of mediation in international law and relations is that a mediator must not simply be acceptable to the disputing parties but must not be partisan in the mediation processes. The United States is openly partisan and does not bother about whatever anyone thinks about it.
For instance, the US is the most reliable ally of Israel and has always used its veto to block any hostile UN resolution on Israel. This is why the US is never on record to be an honest broker in peace-making on the question of the Middle East crisis. The US, by so doing, has always encouraged Israel to disrespect international law, disregard the international community’s policy stand on the resolution of the Middle East crisis.
Additionally, the US Congress adopted by ‘an overwhelming bipartisan majority,’ the Jerusalem EmbassyAct in 1995. TheAct requested for the relocation of US Embassy from TelAviv to Jerusalem over which there is dispute of national sovereignty. For various reasons, and particularly because of the issue of need for a Palestinian State, which also intends to make Jerusalem its capital, allAmerican governments since the adoption of theAct have not implemented the request. They have been issuing waivers. Donald Trump is now the first US president to frontally act against the position of the international community.
As at today, and consistent with international diplomatic practice which requires that all diplomatic missions be accredited to a receiving state should be in the political capital of the state, Israel is playing host to 86 embassies and all of them are in TelAviv. There is no single diplomatic mission in Jerusalem. The US embassy is likely to be the first and possibly the only embassy to be located in Jerusalem. How do we explain Donald Trump’s rationale for the recognition?
President Trump saysAmerican ‘presidents issued these waivers under the belief that delaying the recognition of Jerusalem would advance the cause of peace. Some say they lacked courage, but they made their best judgments based on facts as they understood them at the time. Nevertheless, the record is in.After more than two decades of waivers, we are no closer to a lasting peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. It would be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result.’
Thus, the first main reason given by Donald Trump is that US policy has not been helpful to peace-making and the formula has to be revisited by giving expression to the 1995 Jerusalem EmbassyAct. Another reason is that ‘Israel is a sovereign nation with the right, like every other sovereign nation, to determine its own capital.Acknowledging this as a fact is a necessary condition for achieving peace.’ True, Donald Trump cannot be more correct. However, it is precisely how sovereign rights are exercised in light of global interests that largely determine whether or not there will be peace. Israel, assisted by the United States, has always flouted international resolutions on the matter. This is why peace has been difficult to achieve as an objective.
Athird consideration is the religious and democracy factor. According to Donald Trump, ‘Jerusalem is not just the heart of three great religions, but it is now also the heart of one of the most successful democracies in the world. Over the past seven decades, the Israeli people have built a country where Jews, Muslims, and Christians and people of all faiths are free to live and worship according to their conscience and according to their beliefs.’ The question here is this: have the Jews, Muslims and Christians been prevented from worshiping according to their conscience when the capital has been TelAviv?
Afourth reason, in the thinking of the United States, is that there was ancient Israel and there is modern Israel. The Jewish people ofAncient Israel made the City of Jerusalem their capital. In contemporary Israel, the Jewish people also still want to make Jerusalem their capital. Considering that, ‘today, Jerusalem is the seat of modern Israeli government, it is the home of Israeli parliament, the Knesset, as well as the Israeli Supreme Court, it is the location of the official residence of the Prime Minister and the President, and it is the headquarters of many government ministries,’ President Trump strongly, but wrongly, believes that recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is ‘in the best interests of the United States ofAmerica and the pursuit of peace between Israel and Palestinians.’
We do not share this viewpoint for various reasons. It will be difficult for the US and all its allies to come out and criticise any other country in the foreseeable future of not respecting international law, when the US is openly aiding and abetting Israel to act contrary to international agreements. The North Korean nuclear saga is a case in point. The US is arguing that North Korea is not complying with international instruments prohibiting nuclear tests. How will the US be able to condemn any other country when it is the agent provocateur in the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territory? In illustrating this point of illegality of the US recognition, it is useful to provide a background analysis to the illegal act of recognition.
First, it is important to note that the act of recognition is not in itself illegal. It is a manifestation of the exercise of sovereignty. For a state to exist in international relations, recognition is often required before a state can establish a diplomatic mission but non-recognition does not prevent the existence of a state. Besides, recognition is not required in the location of a political capital. What is more often than not required is the location of diplomatic missions in very secure areas, especially where their persons will be most difficult to be violated.
Second, Donald Trump stated that ‘the United States remains deeply committed to help facilitate a peace agreement that is acceptable to both sides’ and that he would do everything in his power ‘to help forge such an agreement.’ We contend here again that it is not possible for a partisan umpire or mediator to seek acceptable agreement to two warring parties.Already, the pronouncement of the recognition has not only been generating heated controversy but also violent protests.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the genesis of the Middle East crisis is in conflict with the act of recognition. It was a Zionist scientist, Chaim Weizmann, who pressured and persuaded the British government to issue a public statement in favour of the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, in light of the major contributions of the Jews to the British war effort against the Turks during World War 1. The British government acceded to the pressure and came up with the 1917 Williams Balfour Declaration which was ratified by the then League of Nations. On this basis, Britain was given the mandate to rule over Palestine in 1922.
This development created mixed feelings at the level of Jews andArabs. The Jews were quite happy that they would soon possibly have a home, hence the beginning of their immigration back to Palestine, following their persecution by Nazi Germany. As noted by the US NationalArchives, ‘the arrival of many Jewish immigrants in the 1930s awakenedArab fears that Palestine would become a national homeland for the Jews. By 1936, guerrilla fighting had broken out between the Jews and theArabs. Unable to maintain peace, Britain issued a white paper in 1939 that restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine. The Jews, feeling betrayed, bitterly opposed the policy and looked to the United States for support.’ This was part of the first foundations of the Israelo-American solidarity in the quest for a homeland for the Jews.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had sympathy for the Jews but told theArabs that ‘the United States would not intervene without consulting both parties,’ which created doubts in the minds of theArabs. President Harry S. Truman who succeeded Roosevelt accepted the Balfour Declaration, considering that the Jews needed a homeland following the holocaust to which they had been subjected. The sympathy of the United States for the Jews led to the establishment of anAnglo-American Committee of Inquiry, which made a ten-point recommendation inApril 1946.
One of the recommendations was the Need for Peace in Palestine but there would not be peace.As further noted by the US National Archives, ‘British,Arab and Jewish reactions to the recommendations were not favourable. Jewish terrorism in Palestine antagonised the British, and by February 1947Arab-Jewish communications had collapsed. Britain, anxious to rid itself of the problem, set the United Nations in motion, formally requesting onApril 2, 1947, that the UN GeneralAssembly set up the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). This committee recommended that the British mandate over Palestine be ended and that the territory be partitioned into two states.’
The Jews, some of whom wanted the totality of the Palestinian land, as well as theAmericans, accepted the partitioning but the Arabs vehemently opposed. TheArab League Council therefore directed its member states to move their troops to the Palestinian border in October 1947. On May 14, 1948, the Provisional government of Israel proclaimed a New State of Israel which was immediately recognised by President Truman on that same day.
As drafted and approved by President Truman, ‘This government has been informed that a Jewish State has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the (Provisional) Government thereof. The United States recognises the provisional government as the de facto authority of the new (State of) Jewish State of (Israel). The words in bracket were the words inserted by President Truman before he approved the draft letter of recognition.
The Bile and Problems
What is particularly noteworthy about the letter is that the recognition came immediately after the proclamation of the new state. Besides, the US considered the Israeli government as a provisional one, and more importantly, that the provisional government was simply a de facto, and not a de jure one. Since the proclamation of the State of Israel, the Middle East has never known peace, as theArabs and the Israelis have fought three wars with Israel always winning the battles but neither winning the war nor peace. The wars were fought in 1948, 1967, and 1973.
In 1948, Israel captured the Western half of Jerusalem and occupied it. Since then Israel lays claim to ownership through effective occupation of the land.