Yet another Nail in the Coffin of the “Deal of the Century?”
Since the start of his presidential campaign in mid-2015, then-candidate Donald Trump presented scattered ideas on a variety of issues with no coherent strategy on what he would do if elected president. As a successful deal maker in the real estate business, he called his proposed solution to the sensitive Israeli-Palestinian conflict the “Deal of the Century.”
A deal, as we all know, is “an agreement entered into by two or more parties for their mutual benefit” as defined in the dictionary. However, candidate Trump during his campaign expressed complete support for the Israeli side while consistently issuing harsh criticism for the Palestinians. At the time, many people thought it was pure campaign rhetoric and that, if elected, Trump would follow in the steps of his predecessors with a relatively realistic approach to the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
But this was not to be. These hopes were dashed on December the 6th 2017 when President Trump announced the U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and promised to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem (the move took place in May 2018). This unexpected announcement was strongly criticized by the United Nations, the European Union and most countries in the world. The announcement was followed up with strong U.S. administration pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian actions to include trying to strip 90% of the Palestinians of their refugee status, canceling U.S. financial support of the UNRWA budget and closing the Palestinian diplomatic office in Washington.
As these actions were taken, President Trump continued talking about his “Deal of the Century” that was being prepared by his (inexperienced) son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner. The White House has been silent on details of the deal. Is it because the White House knows the deal is already dead and lying in its coffin?
If any hope still existed to revive it, Trump unfortunately dashed that hope by adding another nail to this coffin when, while receiving American Jews in the White House on the occasion of the Hanukkah, he insinuated that his Vice-President Mike Pence and his wife had a double allegiance to the U.S. and Israel: “…they go there and they love your country. They love your country. And they love this country. That’s a good combination, right?”
We sincerely hope that the President was not hinting at a double allegiance which, if it is acceptable for the Vice President, should then be permissible for the American populace. Can America still be a superpower in such circumstances?
Pence’s love for Israel may be based solely on religious grounds since Pence converted from Catholicism to Evangelicalism at age 19 and became a zealous follower of this religion which believes in the fulfillment of end-times prophecy through the reestablishment of Israel and the return of Jesus.
But the Israel that Trump was talking about is the state that occupies Palestinian land after evicting its occupants in 1948, perseveres in its oppression of the Palestinians and uses U.S weapons to contain the rock throwing Palestinian youth. The hint of double allegiance in Trump’s Hanukkah speech is misguided on at least two levels:
- Americans should have allegiance and be loyal only to the U.S. A double nationality is one thing. A double loyalty is completely different. Holding the nationality of another country is completely acceptable and legal. But having allegiance to another country puts in doubt the commitment to the interests and values of the United States.
- Reiterating time and again the love for Israel, a country which commits human rights violations of the Palestinians, is not at all conducive to a peace deal. The Trump administration is clearly one-sided in its support for Israel to the exclusion of the Palestinians.
The “Deal of the Century” can only have a glimmer of hope if Israel and the Palestinians make reasonable concessions and attain equal benefits with the guidance of a White House that is equitable in its support for both parties of the deal. In the current circumstances, one can only assume that the “Deal of the Century” is already in the coffin given the U.S. unconditional support for Israel and the stripping of the Palestinians of any negotiable elements that might open the door to a peace accord.
By insinuating, possibly inadvertently, that Vice President Pence is loyal to Israel, Trump has put yet another nail in the coffin of his “Deal of the Century.”