DISTANT NEW WORLD

The situation around the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has reached a critical point. Last chances to achieve at least some progress in resolving one of the most painful problems in world politics hit a dead-end after the decision of the US administration to recognise Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Pompeo's statement

The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo unveiled the decision of the Trump Administration to recognise Jewish settlements on the West Bank as legal according to international law. Thus, the White House revised the previous position of the Obama administration, according to which the construction of Israeli settlements on the West Bank and East Jerusalem was recognised as illegal according to international law.

Israel established control over the West Bank, the eastern part of Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights after the 1967 Six Day War. In fact, numerous resolutions of the UN Security Council recognise the Israeli settlements on the Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, as illegal. This causes one of the main obstacles in settling a long-standing peace between Palestinians Israelis based on the principle of "two states for two peoples."

There are about 120 large and small Jewish settlements with more than half a million Israeli population living on the West Bank, which they call Judea and Samaria. Unlike East Jerusalem or the Golan Heights, these settlements are considered part of Israel neither according to international nor local legislation.

Israel refuses to return to the borders of 1967, because it interprets the relevant clauses of the 1949 Geneva Convention, which prohibits the settlement of the occupied territory by the citizens of the occupying country, in line with the realities of the Middle Eastern conflict. For Israel, Jewish settlements on the West Bank cannot be considered illegal, since the state of Palestine had never existed, the territories of the West Bank had never had sovereignty or belonged to any sovereign state after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. However, this interpretation is against the position of the UN, numerous states, and the Palestinians, who view the construction of Jewish settlements as part of the "occupation" policy of Israel. Therefore, the response of international political organisations to the recent decision of the US administration was quite expected.

"We continue to follow the long-standing position of the UN that Israeli settlements are in breach of international law. A change in the policy position of one state does not modify existing international law nor its interpretation by the International Court of Justice and the Security Council," UN human rights spokesman Rupert Colville said at a press briefing.

The European Union also described Israel's actions as contrary to international law and called on Israel to cease all construction activities in the occupied territories. According to EU High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security Federica Mogherini, "all settlement activity is illegal under international law and it erodes the viability of the two-state solution and the prospects for a lasting peace."

Belgium, France, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom made a separate joint statement and unequivocally confirmed that they still consider Israeli settlements illegal.

Vatican, which criticised the reversal of the US position on Israeli settlements, did not ignore the situation either. The Holy See reaffirmed its commitment to the principle of "two states for two peoples" as the only way to achieve a final settlement of the long-standing conflict.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also expressed concern of his government about the US's refusal of binding decisions of the UN Security Council. According to Lavrov, Mike Pompeo's statement on Israeli settlements is against the relevant decisions of the international community and leads the situation to a dead-end.

Turkey also condemned the statement of the US State Department, and views the construction of Jewish settlements on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem as an attempt to legalise the occupation of Palestinian lands. "We reject the US statement on illegal Jewish settlements. It does not care about international law and the rights of Palestinians," Ibrahim Kalin, spokesperson of the Turkish President said.

Finally, the League of Arab States also sharply condemned the American decision as "an attempt to legitimise Israeli colonial rule."

But why did the US decide to reverse its position on Jewish settlements, knowing that it contradicts the positions of the UN and the vast majority of states?

Motives of Trump

The Trump administration has so far adopted a number of landmark decisions demonstrating a sharp shift in the US's policy on Middle East, which had previously focused on supporting Israel's security. Now it openly and demonstratively recognises the consequences of Israel's policy towards Palestine. The first such step was the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel followed by the recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which, according to international law, is the territory of Syria.

Firstly, the decision to recognise the "Israeli settlements legal" is associated with the support of Donald Trump to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who nevertheless failed to create a right-wing coalition after the second elections. This support can also be explained by Netanyahu's weakening position as a result of corruption charges brought against him. Obviously, the revision of American policy on Jewish settlements encouraged Israeli prime minister. He supported the bill submitted to the Knesset on extending Israel's sovereignty to Jewish settlements in the Jordan Valley: "We haven't had such an opportunity since the Six Day War, and I doubt we'll have another opportunity in the next 50 years."

However, can we say for sure that the Trump administration took an array of openly pro-Israeli measures only as a friendly gesture towards Israel? Many experts, including those in the US and Israel, view these moves as domestic political considerations of the incumbent American president. For example, the 33rd US President Harry Truman welcomed the declaration of independence of Israel in 1948 with the following statement: "I do not have Arab voters, but Jewish voters are very influential people."

Admittedly, the factor of large and influential Jewish diaspora in the US can also explain Trump's desire to please Israeli ambitions. As the head of the Republican administration, which has traditionally been sensitive to the demands of Jewish lobbyists, Trump is under powerful pressure from the Democrats, who threaten the president with impeachment. Trump's connection with the Jewish diaspora is also evident through his son-in-law Jared Kushner, his senior adviser and a descendant from the family of orthodox Jews. By the way, Kushner is considered one of the major American sponsors of Israeli settlements on the West Bank, although he was one of the authors of the failed Deal of the Century—the so-called plan of the Trump administration to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by providing $50b investment in the economy of Palestine, Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon.

But there is another factor that can explain the reason behind Trump's pro-Israeli decisions. A considerable part of his supporters are Evangelical Christians, whose influence on the current American administration is so great that The Jerusalem Post wrote: "Trump cares much more about keeping his base of apocalypse-minded Evangelicals, a handful of deep-pocket Jewish donors and Orthodox Jewish voters working for him, raising money and getting out the votes for his re-election. He is more concerned about the Middle West than the Middle East." Actually, one of the most influential evangelists is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who voiced Washington's refusal to recognise international legal documents regarding Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Evangelicals support Israel, as they believe that the existence of this state is the fulfilment of biblical prophecies about the end of the world. Well-known evangelical pastor Michael Evans called Pompeo's statement a US testimony of "recognising the Bible as legal," confirmation that Judea and Samaria had been promised to the Jews.

Therefore, it is not surprising that Trump, who does not hide his intentions to run for president in 2020, is trying to please the pro-Israeli demands of American evangelists, 81% of whom voted for Trump back in 2016.

Finally, by refusing to invalidate the Jewish settlements, Trump most likely also seeks to nullify the consequences of the decision of the European Court of Justice on special labelling for the goods produced in the territories occupied by Israel. The purpose of this decision is to encourage consumers to make informed choices "not only on the basis of medical, economic, environmental and social factors, but also on the basis of ethical considerations." Labelling also means that products produced in the Jewish settlements are not covered by customs agreements between Israel and the EU. As for the US, having refused to recognise the Jewish settlements as occupied territories, it practically reaffirmed the previously voiced position on the decision of the European Court. According to the US State Department, the US is uncompromisingly against "economic pressure, isolation, and other attempts to delegitimise Israel." It is no coincidence that the Israeli Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, welcoming the new position of the American administration on Jewish settlements, noted that it is "an appropriate response to the decisions of the European Court and the attempts to boycott the State of Israel."

Conflict goes on

What can be the outcome of Washington's recognition of the Jewish settlements?

First of all, the latest US steps do not change anything de facto and de jure in terms of existing international law. Even the Israeli Haaretz admits that Trump's new decision does not make Jewish settlements legal. However, the real problem is that such measures can still make prospects for the settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict void.

According to Al Jazeera, should Israel go ahead and annex major parts of the West Bank, the two-state solution will no longer be viable and the possibility of an independent and contiguous Palestinian state likely dead. Many well-known experts, including the German political scientist Peter Kapern, are also inclined to think that the situation of Palestine is hopeless when Israel, with American support, is gradually annexing land on the right bank of the Jordan River, while other world centres, primarily in Europe, are not ready to strongly support Palestine and focus merely on accusations against the US and Israel.

But what does the hopelessness of Palestine mean in the context of attempts to resolve the conflict? First, the settlement process is on the verge of a final collapse. The head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, called the statement of the US Secretary of State as "very last nail in the coffin of the two-state solution."

Most of the international community supports the two-state solution of the conflict, that is, the peaceful coexistence of the Israeli and Palestinian states, provided that Israel stops the occupation and withdraws Jewish settlements from the West Bank. The decisions of the American administration, in fact, reject the possibility of implementing the two-state solution as the only possible one to settle the conflict.

President Trump describes his steps as an effort to "bring the world closer", because the position of previous presidents, especially Barack Obama, who opposed Jewish settlements in the West Bank, did not help advance the peace process. However, will the decisions of the current US administration to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the Golan Heights as the sovereign territory of the Jewish state, and the construction of Jewish settlements as a legal act bring the world closer? This is a rhetorical question because so far the world is witnessing only the absence of any negotiation process between Israel and Palestine, a significant deterioration in relations between Palestine and the US, as well as the radicalisation of an increasing number of Palestinians. The latter realise that now, after the US recognised the consequences of Israeli occupation, Israel will never leave this policy voluntarily.

It is not surprising that soon after Pompeo's statement, blood spilled again in the region of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. To protest against the recognition of the legitimacy of Jewish settlements, Palestinians held the Wrath Day in Ramallah, Hebron, Shekhem, Beit Lehem, Tul-Karem, and Gaza turning into bloody clashes of demonstrators with Israeli border guards. Israelis and Palestinians continue to live in hostility and hopeless confrontation.