The visit to Israel by US President Donald Trump has come and gone, 
and the analysts will undoubtedly still spend some time considering 
their verdicts dissecting each aspect of the visit.  At first glance, 
the visit appears to have been filled with symbolism but short on 
substance.  Following a turbulent first few months in office for the US 
president, there are many who wonder whether his support for Israel is 
welcome, or whether it is turning out to be more of a poison chalice 
than a helping hand.
Trump has been openly and publicly
 supportive of Israel's position, even from before he was elected.  His 
high profile campaign promise to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to 
Jerusalem has been the subject of much debate and controversy.  When his
 victory in the presidential election was revealed, the Israeli 
government (and many other Israelis) welcomed his election with the hope
 and expectation that this would change the anti-Israel bias within the 
US government and elsewhere that was such a feature of the Obama 
administration.  And changes have certainly been felt since his 
election.
The current atmosphere at the United Nations 
is entirely different from the one that ruled during 2016 and before.  
Part of this change can be attributed to new UN Secretary General 
António Guterres, who is much less inclined to entertain the constant 
barrage of anti-Israel sentiment that prevailed under Ban Ki Moon.  Much
 of the change is, however, thanks to new US ambassador to the UN Nikki 
Haley and the change in policy that she represents.  She has imposed the
 Trump administration's support for Israel at the UN in the strongest 
possible terms.  The days of raising frivolous anti-Israel resolutions 
at the UN Security Council are over for now.  The international 
community has understood that these will be vetoed by the US, and that 
there is little point in raising them under the current administration. 
 Haley has been vociferous in her condemnation of the constant attempts 
to paint Israel in a negative light.  There can be little doubt that the
 changes at the UN have a great deal to do with the new man in the White
 House. 
President Trump's visit to Israel was highly 
symbolic.  He made Israel one of the stops on his maiden foreign tour 
since becoming president.  He visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem 
during his visit, becoming the first US president to make this visit 
while in office.  He emphasized to Palestinian Authority President 
Mahmoud Abbas that funding terror is not acceptable.  He reinforced the 
support that Israel will always enjoy from his administration.  In spite
 of this, he stayed clear of the key substantive issues confronting 
Israel and the region now.  He did not raise the move of the US embassy 
to Jerusalem.  No mention was made of the constant accusations against 
Israel regarding construction in Judea and Samaria.  Nothing was said 
about Palestinian claims to Jerusalem, or accusations regarding Israel's
 claims to Jerusalem as its capital.  His outward shows of support were 
all seized upon, recognised and appreciated by the majority of 
Israelis.  The lack of meaningful progress in getting Israelis and 
Palestinians to sit down around the peace table is what the 
international community has seized upon.
The issue 
that Israel needs to consider is Trump's overall standing within the USA
 and further afield.  It was clear before he arrived in Israel that 
Trump has many enemies at home, and that they are determined to keep him
 on the back foot by levelling all types of accusations against him.  
Trump's own conduct in defending these accusations has certainly not 
helped his cause.  And Israel was dragged into the crossfire when Trump 
was accused of sharing secret intelligence received from Israel with 
Russia.  If true, this would be a serious violation of trust, and norms 
associated  with the sharing of intelligence information.
Distrust
 for Trump appears to be spreading rapidly within the international 
community as well.  Trump's recent appearances at the G7 and NATO 
meetings did not show him to be in accord with any of the other western 
leaders.  On the contrary, there are indications that Trump is being 
sidelined from the key international organisations.
Winston
 Churchill famously said, “Diplomacy is the art of telling people to go 
to hell in such a way that they ask for directions.”  This is an art 
that Trump has clearly not yet mastered.  Even though Trump frequently 
says things that many people are thinking, he has not yet discovered how
 to say it in a way that does not create enemies.  While Israel has no 
particular issue with Trump's popularity (or lack of it) in the 
international community, there is a danger that Israel will be tarred 
with the same negative brush if she is seen to be too closely associated
 with Trump. 
There is no doubt that Israel has already
 gained a great deal from the change of administration in the White 
House.  Trump's influence over US domestic and international policy 
towards Israel, and his influence over proceedings at the UN cannot be 
under-estimated.  Israel will certainly wish to see more of that in the 
future.  There is a danger, however, that the association with Trump 
could prove to be negative in Israel's relationships with other 
countries around the world.  If Trump continues to completely ignore the
 accepted rules of international engagement while representing his 
contrary views, he will quickly became a pariah in the international 
community.  And, even if Israel wishes to stay close to Trump to benefit
 from his supportive views and actions, the association with him may 
proved negative. 
The prime minister and the Israeli 
government has a tough job to navigate a careful path to take advantage 
of the emerging situation, without losing too much in the process.  Will
 Trump prove to be the good things for Israel that were predicted, or a 
poison chalice?  Only time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment