There are many reasons for many Americans not to want Donald Trump as their next President. There are also many reasons for non-Americans to worry about the prospect of America being led by a Donald Trump administration. As I wrote a couple of days ago, I agree with Gideon Rachman's observation that the popularity of Trump's (and Sanders') campaigns “suggests that there is now a strong constituency in the US for a retreat from globalism: repudiating international military and economic commitments.”
But I was not much impressed by Trump's supposedly unsettling promise to have a “neutral” Israeli-Palestinian policy. As my friends at Jewish Insider reported: “Trump refused to take a side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, maintaining a ‘neutral’ approach when asked about it.” When asked to apply fault to Israel or the Palestinians, Trump responded: “Let me be sort of a neutral guy. I don’t want to say whose fault is it. You understand a lot of people have gone down in flames trying to make that deal. So I don’t want to say whose fault it is – I don’t think that helps.”
Some pro-Israel activists and pundits – and obviously Trump's rivals – were quick to seize this opportunity to raise doubts about his commitment to Israel, a country that stands tall among GOP primary (and general election) voters. I was unfazed. Trump was just trying to be smart, and failed to understand that, unlike the case for most other issues and conflicts, when it comes to Israel “neutral” has a negative connotation.
To be honest: I'd be surprised if Trump has any interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His overall message on foreign affairs does not suggest any such tendency. He does not promise to promote peace and understanding – he promises to make America stronger and more intimidating. He does not want to engage in nation building – he wants to bomb enemies and safeguard America. He does not show much sympathy to those people who turn to violence in the Middle East – in fact, he wants all of them banned from American shores. To imagine Trump as the savior of the Palestinian cause would not be easy.
Of course – Trump can still surprise the world. He’s been surprising the world thus far, so maybe the next trick up his sleeve includes investing his time in peace making in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. Or maybe Trump is just being Trump. He used “neutral” because it sounded right to his businessman ears to begin as neutral when you want to prompt negotiations. He then decided to stick with neutral, because Trump doesn't like to correct himself. But look at his clarifying comments (Jewish Insider – your source for many things).
True, the report begins by saying that Trump “doubled down on his suggestion that he would remain neutral on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” but he did not really double down. He corrected his suggestion without saying it is a correction. Talking about why the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is still going on and why bringing about peace would be so difficult, he left very little for anyone's imagination:
“I have been told by people – very high-level people – it’s impossible because the hatred, especially on one side – I won’t even say which side – is so intense; it’s so incredible. And from the time they are two-years-old, they are told to hate, to hate, to hate. It’s got to be taken away. But here is the thing: I’ve been told this is the toughest of all deals. This is the toughest deal to make, okay? This is a deal that’s tough. I have had people that are very smart and great negotiators, involved in negotiations, that this deal, they have not been able to do it. I would like to do it, but I’d like to do it [as a neutral guy]”.
Parse these words:
Trump already said earlier that Israel should not worry because he is a great friend.
He then said that Palestinian hate for Israel is the main obstacle for resolving the conflict.
He then said that smart people could not do it – but that he'd still like to try. It is a challenge, and Trump likes a challenge and likes to succeed where others have failed.
He then repeated that he'd come as a “neutral guy”, giving the impression that he believes that's the way for him to start afresh.
Should this make Israel nervous? I think Israel should be nervous about a Trump presidency for many reasons – one of them is the unpredictable nature of his policies. But is it likely that Trump will side with the Palestinians and pressure Israel into making concessions that will put its security in danger?
To put it another way: what's more likely, that Trump was just blabbering his way through a question for which he did not have a handy and articulate answer – or that he prepares to follow the Obama-Kerry script and pressure Israel into compromise?
I find the answer obvious (but am always ready to be surprised).
