What the Deal of the Century Tells Us About the World We Live In
By James M.
Dorsey
A podcast version of this story is
available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Patreon and Castbox.
The real
issue with US President Donald J. Trump’s Deal of the Century
Israeli-Palestinian peace plan is not whether it stands a chance of resolving one
of the world’s most intractable conflicts. It doesn’t.
More
important is the fact that Israel will, in violation of international law, be
empowered to unilaterally annex occupied territory and take steps towards
creating an ethnically more homogenous state by transferring a significant
proportion of the Jewish state’s Israeli Palestinian population to what the
plan envisions as a future Palestinian entity.
Mr. Trump,
by endorsing annexation and populations transfers that violate the Fourth
Geneva Convention, has put Israel at the cutting edge of an emerging new world
order dominated by civilizationalist leaders.
These
leaders think in terms of might is right rather than adherence to international
law. They envision civilisational states that define themselves and their
boundaries on the basis of a specific civilization as opposed to nation states
that are determined by internationally recognized borders, population and
language and have little time for the rule of law.
In doing so
Mr. Trump, like many of his other likeminded civilizationalist leaders,
including India’s Narendra Modi, China’s Xi Jinping and Myanmar’s Win Myint who
pursue discriminatory policies that marginalize and disenfranchise minorities
and undermine social cohesion, is contributing to a world in which mass
migration, radicalization and increased political violence will likely pose
threats on a far larger scale than they do today.
If Israel
indeed moves ahead with implementation of Mr. Trump’s plan, it will likely find
itself at the forefront of the civilizationalist effort to shape a new world
order that pays little heed to human and minority rights anchored in
international law and that rejects agreements on the status of occupied land
and people that were forged in the wake of the 20th century’s
devastating world wars.
Becoming a
flashpoint in the struggle for the shape of a new world could prove to be for
Israel more of a curse than a blessing.
It could
turn Israel into yet another but nonetheless prime example of what
civilizationalist politics is likely to produce: an illiberal if not
authoritarian state whose policies are at best controversial rather than, as
Israel likes to see itself, the Middle East’s shining and only real democracy,
Few in the
international community, including a majority of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s
civilizationalist counterparts, with the exception of Mr. Trump and potentially
Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro and Hungary’s Victor Orban, would recognize Israel’s
unilaterally declared post-annexation borders.
Responding
to Mr. Trump’s plan, conservative Gulf states praised US efforts to achieve
peace and called for negotiations but were careful not to endorse Mr. Trump’s blueprint
while the Arab League that groups all Arab states outright rejected the
proposal.
This did not
stop Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the head of Sudan’s
post-popular revolt Sovereignty Council who has close ties to Saudi Arabia and
the United Arab Emirates, from meeting
Mr. Netanyahu a day later in Uganda.
Nonetheless,
few in the international community would endorse the deprival of citizenship of
some 300,000 Palestinian Israelis and their transfer together with their lands
in what is known as the Triangle in central Israel to a future Palestinian
state.
Only 13
percent of Israeli Palestinians surveyed last
year by the Israel Democracy Institute defined themselves as first and foremost being Palestinian
while 38 percent said their primary identity was Arab.
Meanwhile,
65 percent said they were “proud to be Israelis.” An even larger number, 83
percent, said they strived to be full members of Israeli society.
"Peace
is made with the enemy. We are residents of the state, and we are not the
enemy. The prime minister (Netanyahu) wants to save his skin at the expense of
inciting hatred against the Arab population," said Shuaa Massarweh Mansour,
the mayor of Taiibeh, a town of 50,000 Israeli Palestinians that was included
in the plan’s suggestion for a population transfer.
Mr. Mansour
was referring to last month’s indictment of Mr. Netanyahu on charges of bribery,
fraud and breach of trust in three separate corruption cases.
Demonstrations
on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip in response to the Trump plan were
fairly muted but that is no guarantee that implementation will not provoke
wide-spread protest directed not only against Israel and the United States but
also the Palestine Authority.
Those
protests would likely spread to Israeli Palestinians resident within Israeli
borders prior to the 1967 Middle East war in which Israel conquered the West
Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights that were annexed before Mr. Trump
endorsed their incorporation into Israel, and Gaza.
An Israeli
crackdown on the protesters would only add to problems created by
implementation of the Trump plan.
The plan
appears to be designed to pre-empt what would be a worst case civilizationalist
scenario in which continued Israeli occupation would force Israel to choose
between being a democracy and a Jewish state because of demographics that would
likely see Palestinians becoming a majority of the population.
The irony is
that implementation of the plan without Palestinian consent and cooperation
could produce the same dilemma.
As a result,
Mr. Trump’s civilizationalist approach towards solving the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict and Mr. Netanyahu’s enthusiastic embrace of the plan threatens to not
only put Israel at the cutting edge of the struggle to shape a new world. It
risks turning Israel into a poster child of everything that is wrong with
civilisationalism.
Dr. James
M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies, an adjunct senior research fellow
at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director
of the University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture
Comments
Post a Comment