Thursday, March 15, 2018

Memorandum on U.S. policy on Jerusalem


Memorandum

TO: President Donald J. Trump
FROM: Joanna Vodola
DATE: March 15, 2018
SUBJECT: Memorandum on U.S. policy on Jerusalem

On December 6th, 2017, President Donald Trump declared that he will honor the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 and recognize Jerusalem as the official capital of Israel as well as move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. President Trump promised to allocate funding for this project through the protection of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995. Despite warnings from many different nations, political figures, and other actors on the political stage, President Trump announced his decision. This memo was drafted to urge President Trump to reconsider his position on the issue to help protect U.S. international economic interests in the Middle East and elsewhere as well as the lives of the employees of the U.S. Embassy to Israel.
Context

On the morning of December 6th, 2017, President Trump announced his decision to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in an effort to emphasize the United States recognizing Jerusalem as the true capital of Israel. After nearly three-quarters of a century, the U.S. Embassy in Israel will begin the process of moving to Jerusalem, the official capital of Israel. While the United State Congress has a long history of supporting this idea, there has never been a president who supported it. In 1995, Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act in both houses almost unanimously. The Act stated that the United States officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and specifically allocated funds to begin building an embassy in Jerusalem. However, no president has followed through with plans for an embassy in Jerusalem until today.

Task and Solution

            While President Trump recognizes this occasion as “…nothing more or less than a recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do”, many other political leaders disagree including Pope Francis and the Chinese foreign ministry who came out against the decision almost immediately. The European Union, as well as NATO, came out against the decision as well insisting that these actions are a “threat to peace in the Middle East”. Without any formal resolution involving the city of Jerusalem and other controversial territories, such as the West Bank and Gaza, the United States has been premature in its decisions. The United States must encourage peace in the Middle East through different means such as encouraging the United Nations to pass resolutions definitively dividing the territories between Israel and Palestine. The United States Congress along with the President must act accordingly.
In order to defuse the tension that has already been caused by this decision, I urge President Trump to reconsider his position and look for a more peaceful solution to Middle Eastern affairs. According to the New York Times, President Trump already has been working towards a negotiation between the Israelis and Palestinians. However, the President undermined his own efforts by making this announcement. Peaceful and diplomatic solutions that work with all involved parties; i.e. the United States, Israel, and Palestine, and possibly the United Nations; are the only way to create lasting peace in the Middle East. With the recent decisions surrounding Jerusalem, which were made with consulting any nation of than Israel, there has been an increase in violence in the region which will escalate when the move has been made.

Evidence

Along with the Chinese foreign ministry and Pope Francis many other political actors have come out against President Trumps decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move the United States embassy there. For example, Federica Mogherini, one on the European Union’s top diplomats said that, “We believe that any action that would undermine these efforts must absolutely be avoided,” when criticizing President Trump’s announcement. Furthermore, since the announcement in December, there has been increased terrorist activity in Gaza as well as inside the city of Jerusalem, including a recent attack which killed two Israeli Police Officers.
Many Arab nations have also been urged to cease trade with the United States until they retract the statement. The unstable nation of the region will soon force the economy to further destabilize creating greater issues without reachable solutions in site. Furthermore, the reason Jerusalem is at the center of great controversy stems from its religious symbolism, in all three Abrahamic faiths. Without a formal solution about the future of the holy sites in the city, the United States cannot infringe on the sovereignty of the nation of Israel or surrounding nations in making their decision for them.

Implementation

Should President Trump listen to my recommendations, the United States to postpone all efforts to build an embassy in Jerusalem until a peaceful solution has been agreed upon by both Israel and Palestine. The United States Diplomat to Israel should work with the Israeli government to find compromises that they are willing to take for the sake of peace and economic stability in the region. The Israelis and Palestinians need to come to a peaceful agreement facilitated by the United Nations or the United States before the United States starts making all their decisions for them.

3 comments:

  1. I agree that Trump's public decision to move the United States embassy in Israel to the controversial city of Jerusalem has posed significant issues for residents of the city, for Israelis, and for Palestinians in areas such as the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Considering that the United States has not always taken the most neutral stance on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, this bold move to suddenly follow through on a resolution made in 1995 has consequences for more than just the United States and the relocation of its embassy.

    I like how you recognize that in some ways, the damage has already been done by President Trump speaking publicly about this decision, but also that there are ways to diffuse the violence of the situation at this time, as the embassy has yet to move. I like how you view this as an opportunity to inspire diplomatic relations between Israel and Palestine, and that you suggest that the United States could be effective in bringing the parties to a solution. I am wondering if a peaceful agreement in the near future would be attainable in the near future, however, considering that diplomatic efforts in the past have been unsuccessful and that Trump's recent actions have complicated the situation and lead to an increase in violence. I like the idea of using the threat of the relocation of the United States embassy to Jerusalem as leverage in an effort to reach an agreement, but I wonder how realistic a solution is at this time, as President Trump has not established himself as a reliable diplomat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you Nicole. I also think the important question is how does the United States propose peaceful and diplomatic solutions when President Trump isn't a reliable diplomat? His decision to acknowledge the embassy act of 1995 has caused a lot of violence and terrorist attacks in Jerusalem, that I am almost afraid of what else Trump and his decisions could cause. Although, I do agree this could be a great opportunity for Israel and Palestine to come together and negotiate, but the how is still up in the air.

      Delete
  2. I agree that certainly the US must consider the effects of moving the US embassy to a new location that has been plagued by conflict. While I don't know that a peaceful agreement will happen anytime soon I think that would be the ideal situation. As Nicole and Adeline mentioned President Trump has been somewhat aggressive and swift in his actions towards other nations, which isn't necessarily a good thing when it comes to diplomacy. I think the solution you mention in your post would be a wise one. As the US it is important for our diplomats to be cautious when addressing conflict areas so as not to make them worse.

    ReplyDelete