Middle East: Opportunity or Setback?

Netanyahu has won a fifth term as prime minister of Israel. On the face of it, this is terrible news. Benjamin Netanyahu (“King Bibi” to his supporters) is a right-wing, ultra-nationalist, militarist populist who is the biggest single obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Or is he? And if he is, is that good or bad?

Modern history has shown that the most obstinate politicalleaders are sometimes the best ones to achieve the required breakthroughcompromise. Richard Nixon’s history as a hardline anti-communist meant that hewas the only one who could open the door to Mao’s China. A similar move by aDemocrat liberal would have been attacked as a “sell-out”

 It required compromise by hardliners Anwar Sadat andMenahem Begin to end decades of war between Egypt and Israel. In NorthernIreland tough men Ian Paisley and IRA leader Martin McGuinness were the onlytwo who could have struck a workable compromise.

While Netanyahu has been beavering away at the hustings,Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and his former lawyer Jason Greenblatthave spent two years hammering out a Middle East peace proposal. The plan is wrappedin the tightest of secrecy cloaks. The only ones who know the details areKushner, Greenblatt, US Ambassador to Israeli David Friedman and Kushner andGrenblatt’s aide Avi Berkowitz. President Trump is regularly briefed on thebroad brush, but his twittering fingers are kept away from the details.

Having said that, a few general thoughts have emerged. In aWashington Post op-ed in July Kushner, Grenblatt and Friedman floated the ideathat the Palestinians abandon the long-held principle of the right of return infavour of a Marshall-type plan for Palestinian areas. Whether those areasinvolve a one-state, two-state, or even no-state or three-state solution isbeing kept under wraps. There is also meant to be an interesting new proposalon Jerusalem in the works.

The plan was meant to be tabled last autumn, but the TrumpAdministration put it back on the shelf because the likelihood of totalrejection by one or both sides was too great at the time. Officials have said,it will remain on the shelf until Kushner and Co think the political stars arein the perfect alignment required for success.

The re-election of Netanyahu is seen by the TrumpAdministration as one of those stars. One diplomat said that Trump’srecognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel; his withdrawal from the IranNuclear Accord, the closure of the Washington diplomatic office for thePalestinians; and the drastic reduction in aid for the Palestinians can be seenas part of a plan by Trump to convince Netanyahu that the American president isthe best—possibly the ONLY—chance of a pro-Israel peace.

Set against that is the fact that Netanyahu hasconsistently opposed peace talks. The current stand-off suits him just fine.The Israelis are clearly the top dog. The Palestinians are not so much theunderdog as the abandoned untermenschen of the Middle East. As such, Kushnerand Co hope that the Palestinians are being backed into a corner where almostany agreement would be preferable to the current downward spiral of corruption,poverty and perpetual war.

There are also factors which could cause the stars to shiftagainst peace. Netanyahu could go to prison on any one of several corruptioncharges. There is also the strong possibility that Iranian forces in Syriacould throw a spanner into the works.

There are historical examples of hard-nosed, obstinatepolitical leaders who have used the public perception of their policies tosecure a legacy of peace. Unfortunately they are the exception rather than therule. There is nothing in Netanyahu or Trump’s history which indicates thateither of them will turn from the politics of fear and division towards peace.But they are uniquely positioned to do so. If either ignores the opportunitythan the election of Bibi is the major setback it appears on the surface to be.

Tom Arms is editor of Lookaheadnews.com