Last month, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken paid a visit to Egypt, Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories amid a severe crisis and a cycle of violence not witnessed in years between Israelis and Palestinians.
Since the start of 2023, Israeli forces have killed at least 35 Palestinians, including eight children, making January one of the deadliest months in the West Bank in recent years. Most casualties occurred during continuous Israeli military raids, especially on the Jenin refugee camp in the northern West Bank, which Israel says it aimed to detain “Palestinian militants.” In retaliation, a shooting attack launched by a Palestinian gunman outside a synagogue in an Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem claimed the lives of seven people.
Urging both the Palestinians and Israelis to calm tensions while reiterating Washington’s “ironclad” commitment to Israel’s security, the top U.S. diplomat reaffirmed Washington’s support for a two-state solution and its opposition to any action by either side, which makes that goal more complex and more distant to achieve such as; settlement expansion, legalization of outposts, demolitions and evictions, disruptions to the historical status quo of the holy sites, incitement and surrender to violence.
On his part, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas blamed the Israeli government for the existing tension and violence in the Palestinian territories, for undermining the two-state solution, and for violating the signed agreements. Besides, Abbas accused the international community of failing to end Israel’s military occupation and its settlement policy in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Before returning to the U.S., Blinken echoed to reporters the familiar message of the long-term U.S. goal of working toward a two-state solution that would establish a Palestinian state alongside Israel under a final peace settlement; however, he gave no details on when and how the U.S. will promote this vision.
Blinken’s visit prompted outrage among Palestinians, who demonstrated in the West Bank and Gaza, accusing Washington of absolute bias toward Israel.
On the other hand, Palestinians said that Blinken’s visit failed to tackle the urgent issues that Palestinians face under occupation.
“The two-state solution is either dead or about to die, mainly because of the Israeli settlement activities. If this administration were serious about a two-state solution, it would have declared it would impose sanctions on Israel unless it stopped settlements activities immediately. Especially in the presence of this most racist, most extreme fascist government in Israel,” Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization Central Council and a veteran politician, said.
Netanyahu returned to power in Israel last December and formed the most right-wing government ever – a coalition of far-right religious and ultranationalist politicians who oppose concessions to the Palestinians and rule out Palestinian independence.
On the eve of Blinken’s arrival, Netanyahu’s Cabinet approved a series of punitive steps against the Palestinians, including plans to step up West Bank settlement construction and demolitions of the homes of attackers’ families as dozens of Palestinian homes were constructed without building permits.
More than 700,000 Israeli settlers live in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, areas captured by Israel in 1967 and claimed by the Palestinians.
Blinken’s visit to the occupied Palestinian territories was not aimed at improving life for Palestinians or supporting a peace process in any meaningful way. On the contrary, despite paying lip service to the two-state formula by standard U.S. foreign policy practice, Blinken has signaled that the White House is not willing to apply pressure and have Israel make the necessary concessions toward it.
U.S. President Joe Biden has not made conflict resolution one of his priorities since he took office. However, he did not rebuff any of his predecessor Donald Trump’s moves that alienated the Palestinians from the negotiating table – first and foremost, his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital outside framework negotiations. Furthermore, he did not try to draw a red line to contain settlement expansion.
Biden had an opportunity to live up to his idealistic human rights rhetoric by rolling back the Trump Administration’s unilateral actions, as doing so would have represented the absolute bare minimum for an administration that claims to support the peace process and a two-state solution. Instead, the Biden Administration has decided to double down on its blank check to Israel.
Biden’s administration has reflected a yearslong U.S. administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has turned the U.S. into a “conflict manager” to support Israel’s security, unwilling to confront it or put pressure on it to make any concessions.
For more than 30 years, although successive U.S. administrations have expressed support for a two-state solution and the establishment of a democratic state of Palestine, they have refrained from using the levers of U.S. power to stem the tide of Israel’s committed crimes against humanity, persecution, including illegal settlement expansion, and the system of domination fitting the legal term of apartheid as described by human rights experts, U.N. bodies, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and prominent legal organizations.
Over the decades, former U.S. Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and the Trump administrations have tried their hands at the Middle East peace plans. Still, unfortunately, in pursuing U.S. interests, this architecture has been struggling under the weight of its contradictions for a long time, with little to show beyond sporadic interventions to halt outbreaks of violence.
Meanwhile, they have used the levers regularly to constrain Palestinians’ diplomatic and legal efforts to fulfill their legitimate aspirations.
The U.S. failure to hold Israel to its commitments and legal obligations has undercut the efforts for any political agreement through negotiations and steered Israelis away from a durable political solution.
Palestinians are unlikely to accept a permanent regime of apartheid and ongoing killings and displacement. As a result, the U.S. approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict needs to be reconsidered, and a new approach to conflict resolution is required by prioritizing rights and human security. In addition, U.S. and international engagement are necessary to prevent the permanent disenfranchisement of the Palestinians living under Israeli control and its negative impacts in an unstable region.
A meaningful and positive, even if modest, international and U.S. response to the Israel-Palestine situation could help change the negative trends on the ground, would align with Biden’s overall U.S. national security strategy, strengthen U.S. alliances with normative actors, and help to restore the nation’s global credibility and stance.
The norms that should shape the new approach must be based on the rights encapsulated in the United Nations Charter, in customary international law to which all states are bound, and in the international Bill of Human Rights, consisting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
