Obama and his administration’s visit to the Middle East in March 2013 was partly to resume the Palestine-Israel peace process, especially when we look at the press conference Obama and Abbas held together in Ramallah, Gaza on March 21. Obama assured that his new Secretary of State John Kerry would be dedicated to the peace process “as much as they can”. Though his significant emphasis on Israel and Palestine’s future as “two states and two people” was patriotic and cheering, questions arise about what will be the next step that his administration, Abbas, and Netanyahu will take for the sake of the regional peace.
Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian National Authority (PA) welcomed Obama with a friendly tone to Ramallah, a sign of their relationship that dated to five years ago, in 2008 when Obama visited Israel during his first term. Abbas pointed out issues like settlements, refugee rights, and arrests that slowed down the peace process five years ago. On March 21, during their press conference, Abbas restated his terms to Obama. Five years may have past since their last encounter but the situation in the region remains unchanged. The reason lies on both sides’ attitudes towards one another, and a significant problem in the relationship of these sides that cannot be neglected is stubbornness. Both sides are too reluctant to break out their old habits and arguments, as Obama puts it, and this breakthrough is crucial for the future of the peace process. Israel continues to extend settlement throughout the PA region, while Hamas responds to this in acts of violence and boycotts, and extends its alliance with Syria and Iran, which in return threatens Israel’s security. This cycle of acts and responses don’t just slow down the peace process but also create unstable environment in the region, which, in turn, concerns American national interests in the area.
Continuing Israeli embargo on the Gaza Strip is another concern that threatens not only Israel-Palestine relations but also its relations with Turkey. Turkey was the first Muslim-majority state in the Middle East to recognize the state of Israel in 1949, and this initiation was an indication of their long-lasting strategic and economic partnership. Turkey is acting as a mediator between the PA and Israel, and acted as one between Syria and Israel prior to the eruption of civil war in Syria in 2011. The relationship between Israel and Turkey nowadays is at its lowest point due to the flotilla crises in May 2010, where the Israeli military attacked Turkish ships carrying humanitarian aid and construction materials to Gaza, which resulted in the death of eight Turkish and one American crew of Mavi Marmara. Prior to this incident, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and Israeli President Shimon Peres’s debate on Gaza at the 2009 World Economic Conference ended with Erdogan storming out of the conference after saying “when it comes to killing, you know well how to kill” to Peres. Together, these incidents damaged the relationship between Israel and Turkey, which in turn harmed the peace process where Turkey was acting as a mediator. Obama’s visit to Israel helped solve this problem. Turkey was expecting a formal apology from Israel since the flotilla crisis of 2010, which Netanyahu officially gave to Erdogan following Obama’s persuasion.
Another regional actor in the peace process is Iran, with its continuing arms aid to Hamas and Fatah, groups that the US recognizes as terrorist organizations. Ahmadinejad’s attitude towards Israel and its allies encourage Hamas and Fatah to resist the Israeli occupation with violent actions like the continuing rocket firing to Israeli urban areas, which in return gives Israel another reason to conduct more oppressive military operations towards Palestine. Iran’s significant role is damaging regional peace, in addition to its uncertain nuclear program, Iran poses a great threat to Israel and its allies. Sectarian conflict is also giving Iran regional legitimacy, where the Shi’a-Islamic regime uses Shi’a minorities across the Sunni-dominated region as a source of negotiation power towards its rival neighbors.
Jordan’s impact in the peace process is also important, where the Hashemite Kingdom is the only state in the region to offer Palestinian refugees citizenship. The historicall role that Jordan played as the main supporter of Palestinian resistance movements, which came to an end with the peace agreement with Israel in 1994, is an indicator of its traditional attitude to the matter.
The general trend in the Israel-Palestine peace process is determined by the change in regional power dynamics. The peace process, therefore, is not only determined by American relations with both PA and Israel but also with the relations of regional actors like Turkey, Iran, and Jordan. Thus, the future of the peace process is not just an outcome of PA-Israel negotiations but also an indicator of the future trends of these regional actors towards Israel and Palestine.
-Mark Bonja
Print 
PDF
