Hopes lost that Obama will make a last act for Palestine
The settlement of Gilo in December 2015 – more housing to be added. See item 2 below. Photo by Lior Mizrahi/Flash90
Palestine: a new move this month?
Summary: expectation that Obama will use his lame duck period for a move on Palestine. The Trump enigma. French still plan a conference this month.
Arab Digest, by email
December 11, 2016
There has long been speculation that the period between the US presidential election and the inauguration of the new president on 20 January might see some major development over the Palestine problem. There are precedents; an article “Will President Obama Launch Lame Duck Israel Surprise?” in the New York Jewish Daily Forward recalls that Ronald Reagan used his lame duck period in 1988 to recognise the PLO and Bill Clinton used his in 2000 to outline the two state solution.
That article was written before the election, and was largely based on the assumption that Hillary Clinton would win. Any plans for a new move will have had to be reviewed in the light of Donald Trump’s election. Reuters suggests [see below] that anything seen as a vindictive parting shot by Obama might make Trump overreact, for example by carrying out his campaign promise to remove the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump’s intentions, if he has any, are no clearer now that they were when we considered them in our posting of 24 November. The latest favourite of media comment to be US Secretary of State (latest of many) Rex Tillerson CEO of Exxon seems to have no track record on Palestine.
One background factor is the bad blood assumed to exist between Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu. This goes back to Obama’s ultimatum to Israel issued at the beginning of his first term demanding that building settlements should stop, which was seen off by Netanyahu in what often seemed a deliberately insulting way, for example announcing new settlement programmes every time a senior US leader turned up in Israel.
Another is the French proposal for an international conference on Palestine before the end of 2016 which would reaffirm the international commitment to a two state solution and relaunch the peace process . Details have not been publicly announced, but on 1 December the French foreign minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said the initiative was not dead, and briefed the Irish Foreign Minister visiting Paris on the plan to convene the conference “before the end of the year”.
The PLO secretary general Saeb Erekat told the Palestine News Agency on 7 December that the conference is set to be held in Paris on 21 December. Also on 7 December Netanyahu said that he would not meet the Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas if the conference took place, but would meet him “for direct talks without preconditions” if there was no conference. “Israel will not participate in an international conference that will not contribute to achieving peace.” Ayrault told reporters “We have to recreate the conditions for a two-state solution and we are determined more than ever to do everything to implement our initiative. The sooner the better.” Invitations had been sent to Netanyahu and Abbas, and President Hollande was planning to call Obama to discuss the proposal. Reuters comments:
With Obama wary of being seen picking a fight at a time when he hopes to persuade Trump to preserve parts of his legacy, including the Iran nuclear deal, Obamacare and the opening to Cuba, it is not clear whether the United States will attend a new meeting in Paris.
If they were not to attend the chances of a conference taking place would be slim, a French diplomat said…
Diplomats said New Zealand was also working on a draft U.N. resolution on the Middle East peace process that would reaffirm the Security Council’s commitment to a two-state solution.
Obama has a number of options, should he decide he wants to leave a mark, including participation in a conference (possibly attended by Palestine but boycotted by Israel), a statement or speech outlining parameters for a settlement, simply abstaining on a Security Council resolution critical of Israel (which might be about settlements), and others. The pros and cons are discussed in a Reuters article of 1 December which concludes by quoting the US ambassador to Israel “We will always oppose unilateral proposals. If there is something more balanced, I cannot guess what the response will be.”
Meanwhile in Israel Netanyahu, perhaps as part of a struggle for power within his right wing coalition, is supporting a bill to legalise settlements on private Palestinian land. “Legalise” here refers to Israeli law, according to which the legal status of settlements dependence on whether they are built on state or private land (full explanation at link). The bill has provoked immediate condemnation, for example from Washington, London, Paris and elsewhere.
The Gilo settlement is between Bethlehem and Jerusalem. Map from BBC.
Last week plans for the construction of 770 housing units in the Gilo settlement in the West Bank reportedly took another step forward**. Residents of the “illegal” Amona settlement also in the West Bank are preparing to resist implementation of an order from the Israeli High Court for evacuation and demolition.
In a long article in the New York Times Magazine their Jerusalem correspondent Rachel Kushner describes life in the Shuafat Refugee Camp in East Jerusalem, home to about 80.000 refugees; “according to Israeli law, inside Israel, and the people who live there are Jerusalem residents, but they are refugees in their own city. Residents pay taxes to Israel, but the camp is barely serviced. There is very little legally supplied water, a scarcely functioning sewage system, essentially no garbage pickup, no road building, no mail service (the streets don’t even have names, much less addresses), virtually no infrastructure of any kind. There is no adequate school system. Israeli emergency fire and medical services do not enter the camp. The Israeli police enter only to make arrests; they provide no security for camp residents.” She was shown around by a charismatic Palestinian community leader Baha Nababta who was murdered two weeks after she left.
Obama, trying to protect legacy, unlikely to act on Mideast peace
By Matt Spetalnick, Reuters
December 01, 2016
WASHINGTON–U.S. President Barack Obama, keen to preserve his legacy on domestic health care and the Iran nuclear deal, is not expected to make major moves on Israeli-Palestinian peace before leaving office, U.S. officials said on Thursday.
One official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the last word on the president’s failed peace effort might come from Secretary of State John Kerry at an appearance on Sunday at an annual Middle East conference in Washington.
March 2013. Despite their efforts none of them can claim MidEast peace for their legacy. Photo by Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
Obama’s aides are wary of being seen picking a fight with Donald Trump at a time when he hopes to persuade the Republican President-elect to preserve parts of his legacy, including the Iran nuclear deal, Obamacare and the opening to Cuba.
While Obama has yet to present his final decision, several officials said he had given no sign that he intended to go against the consensus of his top advisers, who have mostly urged him not to take dramatic steps, a second official said.
“There is no evidence that there is any muscle behind (doing) anything,” said a third official.
Putting new pressure on Israel could be seen as a vindictive parting shot by Obama at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the first official said, noting they have had a testy relationship.
There is concern that Trump, in response, might over-react in trying to demonstrate his own pro-Israel credentials, for example by moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, a step that would enrage Palestinians and create an international furor.
Officials said Obama has weighed enshrining his own outline for a deal in a U.N. Security Council resolution that would live on after he gives way to Trump on Jan. 20. Another idea was to give a speech laying out such parameters.
These options appear to have lost steam.
Kerry, who led the last round of peace talks that collapsed in 2014, appears on Sunday at the Saban Forum conference of U.S., Israeli and Arab officials.
Officials could not rule out that Obama might also talk about Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy before he leaves office. The White House and the Israeli embassy declined comment.
The central issues to be resolved in the conflict include borders between Israel and a future Palestinian state, the fate of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, which most nations regard as illegal, the fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem.
Israeli officials remain concerned that Obama and his aides have not explicitly ruled out some kind of last-ditch U.S. action, either at the United Nations or in another public forum.
U.S. officials said Obama could also have his hand forced, notably if another nation like France put forward a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli settlement activity as illegal or illegitimate, daring Washington to veto it as it did a similar French-proposed resolution in 2011.
U.S. ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, asked if Washington would again veto a French proposal, told Israel’s Army Radio: “We will always oppose unilateral proposals.”
He added: “If there is something more balanced, I cannot guess what the response will be.”
Additional reporting by Jeffrey Heller in Jerusalem
* See also Settlement bill allows seizure of Palestinian land
** See also Dozens of new homes said set to be approved in East Jerusalem
Construction in Gilo bound to infuriate the Americans, Channel 2 says, adding that numerous other building plans also to be ‘taken out of the freezer’.
Times of Israel staff, September 15, 2016