In a time when ideological innocence and the expectation that leaders fully implement their commitments to the voters have supposedly been shelved, the decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to carry out his declaration from Dec. 6 to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move the U.S. Embassy there as present for Israel's 70th anniversary serves as yet more clear proof that this is a president who thinks and acts outside the box.
The same way that then-President Harry Truman exhibited unusual determination when he took a stand against all the diplomats and strategists in his administration and recognized the new State of Israel 11 minutes after David Ben-Gurion declared its foundation, the 45th U.S. president has chosen to ignore the apocalyptic warnings and predictions of more than a few senior officials in the bureaucratic establishment of the State Department and the Pentagon. He has proven again that he is not bound by the operating code of his predecessors, who usually saw election promises about Jerusalem as nothing more than ineffectual rhetoric.
Just like he managed to fulfill his central campaign promise of wide-reaching tax reform, Trump has also not hesitated – despite opposition at home and abroad – to plow forward on the delicate path he laid out for himself on the matter of Jerusalem. But beyond this demonstration of firm presidential leadership, which is light years from the cautious, hesitant (and sometimes louche) style of his predecessor, Trump's latest decision points to the strength of the "special relations" between Washington and Jerusalem. After an eight-year low in which the ideological aspect of that alliance wore away, in this past year we've seen a revival of the message on which rests the American support for, identification with, and ties to Israel.
Still, despite the importance of the principle behind Trump's declaration, we cannot ignore the political consideration that also played a part. First of all, this is a particularly toothsome bonbon for Israel given the nascent peace plan the Trump administration is working on, one that is supposed to soften the expected objection to other aspects of the plan and convince Israel to take risks as it steps beyond the Rubicon. It will, with a loyal partner at its side that is willing to compensate it, and a strong safety net in place for every concession Israel will be asked to make.
If in the Israeli context the decision about the embassy can be characterized as an incentive, for the Palestinian Authority it is a threatening warning that signals to PA President Mahmoud Abbas that Trump's big real estate deal has made it to the final stages. So if Abbas sticks to his contrarian line, his window of opportunity to achieve at least some of his strategic coals will close and that preserving the status quo entails real, immediate costs for the Palestinian people.
Finally, we cannot discount the possibility that the timing of the White House decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem is designed to make it clear to the Israeli public in general and the government coalition in particular the extent to which the Trump administration sees continued cooperation with the current government as optimal. This means there is also concern about the possibility that the investigations involving the prime minister could propel the Israeli partner into a period of instability and uncertainty that will put the final nail in the coffin of the new peace process even before it officially gets off the ground. All that remains is to wait and see if there is a basis for the president's worry.
