By Dimitri Tsolakis
Introduction
The stateless nation of Palestine is accustomed to international occupation and has long fought for its independence. The involvement of international superpowers has depleted the sovereignty and independence of Palestine, as colonization and imperialism remain prominent forces in the nation due to its occupation. The suppression of Palestinians is due to Israeli infrastructure and government as it illegally expands, diminishing the possibility of an independent Palestine. This report will focus specifically on the “Deal of the Century '' enacted by the Trump administration to assuage the centuries-old Palestinian-Israeli conflict, analyzing how American involvement in Palestine has severely affected its sovereignty and likelihood to achieve independence. The implementation of the deal raises the question, how does the “Deal of the Century” add to the legacy of foreign involvement and meddling in Palestine? This report will analyze the deal, examining it through both Israeli and Palestinian perspectives, and then compare its contributions to past interventions in Palestine.
Historical Understanding
Throughout its history, foreign powers have taken advantage of and exploited the Middle East, evident through waves of European colonialism as country to country fell to colonial rule. Alegria was occupied by France in 1830, followed by Tunisia in 1881, Egypt in 1882, Sudan in 1889, and Libya and Morocco in 1912. More contemporary examples of foreign powers' involvement in the Middle East include western arms trading, support for militia groups and strategic backing of state governments, control over beneficial resources like the oil industry, and other soft power moves. Yet, Palestine has suffered the most from foreign involvement, as it lost its sovereignty, independence, and its people through mass displacement. Due to the end of World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Palestine fell under British control and since then they have been fighting for their freedom back. Meanwhile, Israel has grown and dominated Palestine through several bloody conflicts and wars.
Deconstructing the “Deal of The Century”
Trump and his administration promoted the “Deal of The Century'' as a partition of peace and a great deal for Palestinian sovereignty. The deal was advertised as being the best plan for peace by establishing two states in the territory. However, uniquely this deal was in favor of Israeli ideals neglecting Palestinian input ignoring ideals of true peace masking United States personal intrests. Scholar Youseff Younis describes the deal as being representative of “the Israeli right-wing's vision” focusing on Israeli desires and visions for the region. The deal displays vigorous support for the annexation of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. In addition, the deal proposes limited autonomy to Palestine, and states it would have to undergo four years of peace to obtain full sovereignty over the fragmented land they are prescribed by Israel and the Trump administration.
The Trump administration varied greatly, from other administrations, in the way it involved the US in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In the past, U.S. presidents have acted as mediators between the two nations. Examples of this include The Camp David Accords with mediation from President Jimmy Carter and the Oslo Agreement from Bill Clinton. Previously, the U.S. took an approach in which it proposed solutions to the conflict and mediated peace deals still while funding Israel solely. The U.S. adopted and supported “the Israeli side and adopted the Israeli government's plans.” During the Trump administration, the U.S. was more involved in the conflict and in deciding the fate of Palestine. The prolonged conflict is evident in Isreali conflict against Palestinian freedom and sovereignty through many uprisings and wars like the Six-Day War, during which it obtained more land than it was given by the United Nations. Yet, in Trump's meddling in Palestine, Israel was offered a deal “with substantial territory in the West Bank on a silver platter that no other US president in the past has extended to Israel before.” The U.S. under Trump's administration took a controversial and inappropriate stance on the conflict causing havoc that mirrored the detrimental effects U.S. involvement in Iraq had during George W. Bush’s presidency.
Trump's peace deal intended to resolve the conflict in the area by adopting an Israeli perspective and prioritizing Israeli needs, such as continued establishment of Isreali settlements in Palestinian designated territory, above that of Palestinians. Currently, Palestine is undergoing a series of economic and political troubles. Evidence shows that “about one in three Palestinians in the labor market is unemployed [and that] in Gaza, the unemployment rate is above 50% while the poverty level has reached 53%.” These economic issues have been worsened by Israel which held “a portion of the taxes it collects on behalf of the Palestinians” that they are obligated to return back to the Palestinian Authority under the Oslo Accords. Palestine is described by the United Nations as facing “unprecedented financial, security and political challenges” and reports have expressed that Palestine is “on the brink of bankruptcy.” In addition to the failing economy, the political sphere in Palestine is continuously divided. The Political conflict is worsened by the fact that Palestinians are divided physically, as major populations live both in the Gaza Strip, and in the West Bank separated through Israeli settlements. The West Bank political structure is powered by the Fatah heirs while the Gaza Strip is dominated and ruled by Hamas, which is an extremist liberation group descended from the Muslim Brotherhood.
Taking into account the economic and political hardships faced by the Palestinian authorities, it is evident that they need the economic and political support that is provided to Israel, so why didn’t the Trump administration aid Palestine? Why did the “Deal of the Century'' not account for the economic and political hardships of Palestine and offer them aid and the autonomy to govern their people? Individuals can argue Trump tried to offer economic support to Palestine and a sense of autonomy only after four years of controlled sovereignty. However, it is clear that Trump only wanted to ensure a powerful western presence in the Middle East in his affairs with Israel and Palestine. Foreign support for Israel allows western countries a means to spread western ideologies and maintain control over the Middle East. Overall, Trump’s plan was not beneficial for Palestine and the intervention of the USA in Palestine negatively affected their sovereignty and cause.
There are other examples of negative U.S. interference in Palestine that display how the United States failed to take into account the Palestinian needs and desire for sovereignty. At the same time as the “Deal of the Century”, Trump made “the decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital by moving its embassy there, to shutter the PLO's embassy in Washington, and to defund the U.N. Palestinian refugee agency, UNRWA, and the USAID mission to the West Bank and Gaza.” The U.S. claims to wage peace in the Middle East but continues to simultaneously undermine Palestinian sovereignty and favor Israel. U.S. involvement in Palestine doesn’t take into account its priorities. This is why Palestine cut off communication and ties with the U.S. after it recognized Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. The United States continues to hold a bias toward Israeli needs. The U.S. favors Israel further through the support of the expansion of “Jewish settlement anywhere in what they called the Land of Israel, and specifically targeting Area C of the West Bank”, which was designated land for Palestine in the Oslo Accords. Altogether, the US and Israel broke international law through the “Deal of the Century” with little to no repercussions as Trump commended it and provided more support through his Israeli “Deal of the Century”.
Palestinian Perspective and Thought
For Palestine, the deal meant newly drawn borders that were decided upon in the interest of the Trump administration and the Israeli government. The deal “envisioned a territorial space for Palestinians of craftily engineered ‘cartographic chaos’ – a bollixed territorial jumble designed to enhance pervasive Israeli ‘deep securitization.’” Organizations recognize the disappointing offered land of Palestine as its sparsely allocated resembling something like swiss cheese. The UN even passed a resolution in favor of recognizing the occupation and human rights abuses in Palestine with the “resolution promoted by the Palestinians pass[ing] by a vote of 87 in favor, 26 against, with 53 abstentions.” The UN recognizes the occupation and the diminishing of Palestinian territory in the region as “The resolution demands the court to weigh in on the conflict in accordance with international law and the UN charter.”
The intent of the “Deal of the Century” was to bring peace. However, this deal was yet another failed intervention from western powers in the Middle East that only fueled the conflict in the region. Trump's interference raised religious conflict between the two nations, as he declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel and empowered the government to have control over religious holy lands. This in turn, “challenges Palestinians' right of access to the holy sites.” The Peace Plan was completely disrespectful towards Palestine as Trump and Israel basically offered Palestinians “a perforated slice of territory from their homeland and calling it the “‘State of Palestine’” after tremendous struggles and conflict already faced. The deal had no intention of benefitting Palestinians, but to further the Israeli cause, expand western ideology, serve as a performative tool to international powers, and legalize the illegal annexation of Palestinian land.
Continued analysis of the plan further exposes how the plan wasn’t in favor of peace but was rather made for upholding Israeli pride and spreading western power. Trump's efforts in establishing the deal add to the legacy of international intervention by upholding colonialism and imperialism. Thus, he has also caused more conflict in the region instead of upholding peace, providing aid, and respecting the sovereignty of the Middle East. Even though the deal is advertised by Trump as being the last hope for Palestinian freedom, it actually undermines their sovereignty and demands. The deal entails that “the OPT will remain under Israeli sovereignty and control, which means that any Palestinian sovereignty will be incomplete.” The deal tarnishes their sovereignty as “Israel will maintain full control of security in the Palestinian occupied territories.” In addition, the plan details how “the Israeli security forces will gradually redeploy its forces outside of areas A & B, while adding new lands from Area C, in accordance with the Palestinian performance without a time schedule, and a Palestinian state will be declared in those areas.” So, in simpler terms, the deal doesn’t even ensure sovereignty and an autonomous state, but rather is insinuating that there is a possibility of autonomy in the future as long as they meet the criteria declared by the U.S. and Israel. Through the research presented here, it becomes evident that the “Deal of the Century” was not the peace deal Palestine was hoping for, but rather an Israeli and western driven plan to further the spread and control of Israel.
Conclusion
Palestinian officials and the public were outraged and embarrassed as they were not involved in the discourse and were manipulated out of their land once again. The Palestinian Authority responded by rejecting the unofficial details of the Deal of The Century and the Trump administration's decision to move the American embassy to Jerusalem, boycotted any American role in the peace process, and refused to meet with Vice President Pence in Palestine. The Palestinian President accused the U.S. administration of hindering the peace process and described it as "the slap of the century" because it is a final termination of the Palestinian “people's rights.” Throughout this report, I have argued the “Deal of the Century” was unbeneficial for Palestine and biased towards the needs of Israel, which is supported by the action taken by the Palestinian Authority.
In conclusion, this deal should have never been made or even supported by anyone. The “Deal of the Century” was an illegal deal, as it violated several international laws like, “UNGA Resolution 2253 of 1967 [which] called on Israel to halt its changes in Jerusalem; UNSC Resolution 252 of 1968 [which] considered Israel's actions in Jerusalem illegal and a violation of the Geneva Convention” and “Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Civil Convention of 1949 [which] states that "the occupying power shall not... transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies; “UNSC Resolution 446 of 1979 confirmed that settlement and the transfer of settlers to the Palestinian territory are illegal.” The “Deal of the Century” was just an act by the US to further western ideologies, spread colonialism, further the Israeli agenda, continue the discrimination of Palestinians, and legalize the illegal activities of Israel. The Deal of The Century was a failed plan which should be amended with future peace treaties that included an outspoken Palstinian voice that raises concerns and aspirations of sovereignty for the Palestinian people. Future peace treaties should also hold the Israeli occupiers accountable for their human rights abuses in international criminal courts. Lastly, new deals focused on the conflict should allow for a right of return of exiled Palestinians limiting the influx of Jewish settlement and bizarre migration of individuals claiming the right to land with no national ties. At last, the deal adds to the long history of oppressive western interference in the Middle East.
Comments