TRUMP HOLDS ON TO HIS JERUSALEM DECISION UNTIL THE VERY LAST MINUTE
▶ President’s statement, expected tomorrow, will be five days after deadline for waiver to halt move of US embassy from Tel Aviv. Joyce Karam reports
The focus in president Donald Trump’s statement on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, expected tomorrow, is whether he recognises Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, upending seven decades of US policy.
The final decision would be announced five days after the congressional deadline passed for the six-month presidential waiver required since 1995 to block the embassy move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Mr Trump’s senior aide overseeing the peace process, Jared Kushner, and his national security adviser H R McMaster, say no decision has been made and the president appears to be considering several options.
A US official said he would most likely issue a waiver on moving the embassy, but has to yet decide on recognising the city as Israel’s capital.
Aaron Miller, vice president for new initiatives at the Woodrow Wilson Centre who has dealt with the peace process while serving in six US administrations, said: “There isn’t one single US national interest that should prompt the president to move the embassy or declare Jerusalem the capital”, at least for now.
Mr Miller predicted that Mr Trump would sign the waiver “but he may announce a change in policy to declare Jerusalem or West Jerusalem as capital”.
The president could also opt to open a new embassy in Jerusalem without relocating the one in Tel Aviv, he said.
Mr Miller said a policy change by the Trump government could have three motivations.
The first could be to “throw lot of honey in Israel’s way in an effort to get concessions from the Israeli government when eventually a peace initiative is put in place”, he said.
Second, it could be an attempt by Mr Trump to “demonstrate that he is the most pro-Israel president since Harry Truman”, who served from 1945 to 1953.
Or third, it could “just be Mr Trump being frustrated with the status quo, and that he doesn’t want to sign the waiver again while fulfilling a campaign commitment”.
Mr Miller said it was hard to predict the effects on Arabs of such change in policy, but that armed Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad could exploit the fury to incite violence.
Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East policy, said such reactions for simply declaring Jerusalem the Israeli capital may be overblown.
“My general view is that most Arabs probably wonder why Israel’s leading ally doesn’t already recognise its capital,” Mr Satloff said. “Difficult to imagine this is a major development in a region racked by such violence and change.
“There is a wise way for the president to take this step and a needlessly provocative way, by repairing the historic wrong and recognising a reality that has been the case since 1949 without getting into details of recognising any particular municipal boundaries of the city.”
Instead, the “US should affirm its willingness to assist the parties to negotiate a final status agreement on Jerusalem, as they have promised, and should affirm its recognition of Jordan’s special rights in the holy sites, which is not affected by this announcement”.
The US congress has already recognised Jerusalem as capital of Israel and mandated in 1995 to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by 1999.
Since then every US president has issued waivers to block such move.
But for former Palestinian negotiator Ghaith Al Omari, there is no diplomatic way that Mr Trump can announce such decision.
“No matter how diplomatically finessed it may be, politically it will cause trouble,” said Mr Al Omari, a fellow at the Washington Institute. “All political actors are competing as to who will reject it more vociferously.
“The Palestinians will force the Arabs to reject it via the Arab League, the Jordanians are very worried, Turkey already rejected it and there are even reports that Iraqi leader Moqtada Al Sadr asked his followers to take to the streets.”
Mr Al Omari said the major question was “whether it will lead to disturbances on the ground in Palestine and in Arab countries”.