In the weeks leading up to the relocation of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem,
supporters of the Trump administration argued that his decision
exemplifies "America First" foreign policy, and that previous
administrations - going back to the time of Harry Truman - subordinated
U.S. interests for the sake of internationalism, by not recognizing
Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
While
as the executive director of a Christian peacemaking organization,
Churches for Middle East Peace, I am no proponent of an America First
foreign policy, this argument is deeply flawed.
Recognizing
Jerusalem as the unilateral capital of Israel, while ignoring the
presence and aspirations of more than 300,000 Palestinian residents of
Jerusalem, the ties of more than two and a half million Palestinians in
the West Bank, and the millions of diaspora Palestinians around the
world, is not in America’s national interest.
U.S. Vice
President Mike Pence stands by as U.S. President Donald Trump signs a
proclamation recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel during an
address from the White House in Washington on DeceKevin Lamarque
An
"America First" foreign policy in the Middle East must surely rely on
the close cooperation of our regional allies. Our allies in the region
not only include Israel, but nations that deeply sympathize with the
plight of the Palestinians and their struggle for self-determination. An
unabashedly unilateral approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
compromises our relations with Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the GCC
nations and Turkey.
I
assert that it is never in the best interests of the United States to
pursue policies that will exacerbate tensions between Israel and the
Islamic world.
Seventy years of U.S. foreign policy have
painstakingly attempted to maintain this delicate coalition, and to
characterize this policy as subordinating American interests to
internationalism, compromise, and multilateralism vastly misjudges the
complexities of conducting foreign policy in this region.
As
a Christian peace advocate, I fervently hope that the U.S. will broaden
its foreign policy objectives beyond pure self-interest and take into
account the wellbeing of all peoples around the globe.
But
even the most self-interested of foreign policy makers can clearly see
how the decision to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital
will prove detrimental to U.S. interests.
William Rogers, Secretary of State during the
Nixon administration - whose foreign policy was the epitome of "America
First" realpolitik - wrote in 1969: "Our policy is and will continue to
be a balanced one. We have friendly ties with both Arabs and
Israelis.Therefore, our policy is to encourage the Arabs to accept a
permanent peace based on a binding agreement and to urge the Israelis to
withdraw from occupied territory when their territorial integrity is
assured as envisaged by the Security Council Resolution."
Withdrawing from occupied territory, as envisioned by the UN Security
Council, includes East Jerusalem. Nixon’s policy of U.S. support for a
peace based on Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories came
from an administration that can hardly be characterized as "subservient
to internationalism."
This
is not to say that the Jewish residents of Jerusalem and Israel do not
have unique ties to the city, historically, religiously, and
politically. I in no way oppose Israeli aspirations to see West
Jerusalem serve as their capital.
But when the United States recognizes the claims
of Israel without any regard for the claims of the Palestinians, the
message we send as a nation is that we see no political profit in a
negotiated resolution to this conflict. That is a very dangerous message
to send in the current political climate of the Middle East.
Writing-off
such warnings as the baseless hand wringing of an "Arabophile" State
Department, as many of this administration’s defenders have, completely
ignores the connection between U.S. foreign policy, anti-American
sentiment, and its ultimate consequence - radicalization.
Lives do indeed hang in the balance with this decision: Palestinian lives, Israeli lives - and yes - even American lives.
Rev.
Dr. Mae Elise Cannon is the Executive Director at Churches for Middle
East Peace (CMEP), a coalition of 27 Church denominations working to
encourage U.S. policies promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace. She is an
ordained pastor in the Evangelical Covenant Church.
24 gennaio 2022 – Haaretz ZEITUN.INFO Israele ha molto da perdere da una guerra Russia-Ucraina – Zeitun Israele-piano saudita e mondo arabo Essendo uno dei pochi Paesi ad avere stretti legami diplomatici sia con Kiev che con Mosca , Israele cercherà di tenersi in disparte se le due parti entreranno in guerra. L’ottobre scorso, nell’incontro con Vladimir Putin a Sochi, Naftali Bennett si è offerto di organizzare un vertice tra il presidente russo e il suo omologo ucraino, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Secondo un articolo di Barak Ravid su Walla [sito internet israeliano di informazione, ndtr.], la proposta è stata avanzata dal primo ministro israeliano con il benestare di Zelenskyy, ma Putin ha rifiutato. Pochi mesi prima, il predecessore di Bennett, Benjamin Netanyahu, aveva fatto un’offerta simile a Putin, anch’essa respinta. Un vertice Russia-Ucraina a Gerusalemme avrebbe effettivamente senso per tutta una serie di elementi. Israele è uno dei pochi Paesi ad avere...
Gaza guerra Hamas e Israele THEDRIFTMAG.COM “A Desperate Situation Getting More Desperate” LA DERIVA DaIl raccapricciante attacco di Hamas del 7 ottobre, abbiamo visto Israele – con la benedizione e l'aiuto materiale del nostro governo – bombardare i residenti prigionieri della Striscia di Gaza e sfollare più di un milione di persone. Mentre i manifestanti di tutto il mondo esprimevano indignazione per la violenza israeliana, nella sinistra americana si svolgevano una serie di dibattiti: se il lutto per la morte di 1.400 israeliani prestasse copertura alla brutalità militare di Israele, o non esprimere il dolore equivalesse a condonare Hamas; se l’analogia storica corretta da invocare in questo momento sia l’11 settembre, o il movimento indipendentista algerino, o la campagna contro l’apartheid in Sud Africa; se coloro che sono in strada o nei notiziari via cavo tradiscono la loro ignoranza della storia. Ci siamo rivolti a Rashid Khalidi, studioso di storia moderna del Medio Orie...
ussia outs Israel, says two Israeli fighter jets struck Iranian base in Syria U.K. and France working on rapid response to Syria chemical attack Israel is now directly confronting Iran in Syria Israel Informed Washington Ahead of Syria Strike on Air Base, U.S. Officials Say WASHINGTON - Israel informed the United States of its plans to attack in Syria overnight , two U.S. officials told NBC...
Gaza, 9 apr. (Adnkronos/Dpa) - Il braccio armato di Hamas respinge ogni possibilita' di un cessate il fuoco con Israele dopo che un raid israeliano ha ucciso tre suoi comandanti. "Non possiamo parlare di cessate il fuoco tra noi e gli occupanti mentre la nostra gente viene bombardata e massacri vengono commessi ai suoi danni" ha dichiarato Abu Obida, portavoce delle Brigate Al-Kassam. Dichiarazioni, quelle di Obida, che contrastano con quelle fatte in precedenza da Taher al-Noono, portavoce di Hamas, secondo il quale il partito vuole arrivare ad un cessate il fuoco reciproco con Israele. Inoltre, secondo fonti della Difesa israeliana citate dai media israeliani, Hamas ha trasmesso a Israele, per via indiretta, la proposta di un cessate il fuoco. Secondo le fonti, Israele e' disponibile ad accettare l'offerta e intende vedere se vi sara' uno stop ai lanci di missili e colpi di mortaio dalla Striscia di Gaza. MO: Brigate al-Kassam, no a cessate il fuoco con ...
Commenti
Posta un commento