MIDDLE EASTERN SUBTLETIES

Apparently, Washington continues to make adjustments to its Middle Eastern policy. It reverses the changes of the Trump era, trying to re-initiate the political course of the Obama administration.

Thus, Washington is no longer part to the military coalition against Yemen and resumes negotiations on the nuclear deal with Iran. The Biden administration has decided to abandon Trump's policies on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In early April, Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi had a telephone conversation with the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. The latter reminded his colleague that the Palestinians have the right to the same freedom, security, prosperity and democracy as the Israelis. At the same time, Mr. Blinken reaffirmed Washington's commitment to ensure Israel's security.

Trump’s traces everywhere

From his first days as president, Joe Biden has clearly rejected Donald Trump's foreign policy course on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, replacing it with the one implemented by the previous US administrations, including the Obama administration.

Indeed, America's policy to settle this long-standing Middle Eastern conflict under previous Washington administrations, be it the Democrats Clinton and Obama or the Republican Bush Jr., has always been based on a balanced approach. Certainly, Washington was and still remains the main guarantor of Israel's security throughout the existence of the Jewish state. However, previous US administrations have tried to resolve the conflict while maintaining established ties with actors of the broader Arab geography. They took into account the bitter aftermath of past conflicts, in particular the 1973 crisis.

This policy was also based on a certain degree of pragmatism and realities of the time. Former US administrations (and the current one) believed that the best way to resolve the conflict was to create two separate states within the borders that existed before the 1967 Six Day War, with Israel sharing Jerusalem and the pre-war territories with Palestine. This was the most appropriate option in the historical and political context of the time. However, in the 1990s it became clear that the right-wing radical groups on both sides were not only mature enough to make mutual concessions, but were also too strong to prevent it. Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, two intifadas and the emergence of radical armed groups like Hamas and the Islamic Jihad showed the gradual development of a more radical line in the Muslim world after the collapse of the USSR. After the events of September 11, 2001, the US foreign policy has been focused on other issues, hence implicitly contributing to the activation of radical Islamist groups and the growth of anti-Western sentiments in the Muslim world. Meanwhile, the right-wing forces that came to power in Israel tightened the political course in the country. And after the unsuccessful invasion of the Israeli army in Lebanon in 2006, far-right forces have further strengthened their positions.

Thus, the events of the last 20-30 years have sharply lowered any hopes for reconciliation between Arabs and Israelis. Nevertheless, Washington remained committed to a balanced policy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict even under the George W. Bush, Jr administration. The Obama administration, on the other hand, has tried to counterbalance Israel's political course by displaying explicitly a cool attitude towards the right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

With the inauguration of President Donald Trump in 2017, his administration has somewhat downplayed Washington's balanced policy towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Trying to secure the support of the American Jewish lobby, Trump strongly approved the actions of the Israeli authorities. Thus, in 2017, his administration recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, followed by the recognition of the Golan Heights as an Israeli territory a year later – the moves that the former US administrations would explicitly avoid despite the calls from Tel Aviv.

More important than Palestine

Despite the flurry of protests in response to the actions of the Trump administration, most Arab countries have chosen to either remain silent or express their dissent in a softer form. After all, the Islamic Republic of Iran was a much more serious problem for the regional Arab countries. And to counter Iran, they needed Washington’s support. Thanks to the efforts of the Trump administration, four Arab countries (UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco) have so far normalised relations with Israel in addition to Egypt and Jordan.

As the driving force of the Arab world, Saudi Arabia does not hide its positive attitude towards improving relations with Israel. Thus, the Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs, Faisal bin Farhan al Saud, said that the normalisation of Israel’s situation would be good for the entire region in terms of economic, social and security benefits. Nevertheless, due to its traditional strong position in the Arab world, the Saudi government cannot take a step towards Israel but approves of similar actions by other Arab countries of the region. Official position of Riyadh, which would allow the Saudis to establish relations with Israel, implies the creation of two separate states. One of them should be Palestine, with its capital in East Jerusalem and in line with the 1967 borders.

Arab countries are determined to continue the process of reconciliation with Israel even under the Biden administration. But no matter how beneficial the reconciliation for the Arab states is, it requires other conditions be met.

It is known that President Biden has not reversed the decisions of his predecessor on Israel yet. But one of his team members, the official representative of the US State Department, Ned Price, used the term "occupation" in relation to Israel's actions. "Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights during the 1967 war is historic," Price said. Previously, Washington used the same term in the 2020 Human Rights Report, which was not the case during the Trump years.

In other words, the new White House administration is not going to completely abandon Trump's policies towards the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This means that the process launched after the signing of the Abraham Accords between Arabs and Israelis under Trump will also continue.

What's next?

With all due respect to President Trump's efforts to bring peace to the Middle East, also including through his so-called Deal of the Century, which was rightfully considered the largest breakthrough in Israeli foreign policy of the past thirty years, the whole process was, in fact, a final product of negotiations between the Arab regimes and the government of Israel.

In contrast, Palestine is completely unhappy with the ongoing process. The opinion of the entire Arab public community on the issue is also unknown. In addition, the declared reconciliation process was received with hostility by a number of states and quite serious forces.

Obviously, the full-fledged reconciliation between Arabs and Israel is impossible under the current circumstances. Even if the Palestine administration is forced to sign a peace treaty, any progress in this direction will be seriously impeded by other Palestinian circles, as well as the entire Arab Muslim world.

The Biden administration is committed to improving the current state of affairs and making the reconciliation process more substantive, involving all stakeholders. Given the very serious, and sometimes even insoluble issues in the context of the conflict, no one expects the reconciliation process finalise in the near future. Above all, it is extremely important that both nations and the majority of political forces accept the process and implement it in the future. But for now, it is impossible.