Palestine and an Alternative to American Support

The United States’ very hostile and tense position against Palestinian statehood at the U.N. exceeded all expectations. Washington is the one who has led and is leading the battle against the Palestinians on behalf of Tel Aviv, but from within the corridors of the United Nations and UNESCO. We understand that it is the Jewish-owned lobbies that control the decision-making leading the U.S. in this direction, as if they are both blind in their cooperation. But what we do not understand is the deterioration of U.S. policy which hits at the heart of American interests and returns the hostility, full circle, back at America.

Obama’s America has partly changed, even the media, and is different from that of George W. Bush’s — the American military pursuing war in the world, America as a cowboy. Perhaps Obama has been able to improve America’s image in the first year of his tenure, though he too has changed his rhetoric. He managed to raise the ceiling of ambition to the maximum in the Arab and Muslim worlds through his speeches in Istanbul and Cairo.

Throughout the Arab Spring Obama gambled in retreating quickly from allies and followers of U.S. policy in the region, such as the deposed presidents Mubarak and Ben Ali. Because of this policy of abandonment the United States managed to gain some positive balance in the region, even if relative and gradual. Washington pushed the chips of Arab public opinion from a hostile and savage rejection to a position more centered and gray. But the image of America has not changed entirely because of a long black-streaked history of its policies in the region. A change in America’s image will require a long period of change toward new and different policies. But that image has barely budged, if at all.

However, America earned little from returning to support the Arab revolutions so quickly. What America has lost and what American continues to lose is greater than what lies just on the Palestinian front. It appears that America is only pro-Israel; this has become the ABCs of international politics. American appears right-wing, which has increased the interest of many Israelis. In Israel, more than 500 intellectuals issued political statements calling on Tel Aviv to recognize the Palestinian state. This support is partly a recognition of the inevitability of the two state solution. A similar statement was not issued by the United States and making such a statement in Congress is political suicide. The United States cannot change its image in the region amongst the Arabs and the Muslims. America is adopting policies even more right wing than Tel Aviv’s.

The most important aspect of U.S. policy these days is the threat to cut annual aid to the Palestinian Authority, which reaches about half a billion dollars a year. This threat is serious and could twist the arm of the Palestinians, effectively frustrating their efforts. But the issue is not that simple, cutting aid is a galling means by which the United States has taken a further stand against the Palestinians.

Even the use of the “veto” against the Palestinians won’t create any more positive images of the United States, making the situation increasingly more tense. The other negative aspect associated with threatening to cut aid is the resulting loss of American influence over the Palestinians, because providing financial aid means a greater ability to apply pressure on the part of the provider. Thus aid was not an exclusive one-time gift, but rather a pressure mechanism meant to facilitate the implementation of policies.

The model of “U.S. aid” to Egypt is useful and contains many lessons. In recent years, even before the fall of the regime, American aid was employed in Egypt, even at the end of the period of aid, to undermine its sovereignty and interfere in its internal affairs. The perpetrators of this spent most of the “aid” on hundreds of staff and consultants, and nothing but that. When Cairo arrived to the conclusion that American aid did more damage than benefiting Egypt, it asked America to stop sending it aid, but America would not stop; a strange situation, of course. The only explanation is that this aid serves the United States more than it serves Egypt. This is also the mechanism by which Washington lost its political pressure and most of the tools in its bilateral relations with Cairo. The logic of assistance to the Palestinian Authority is of the same nature, any bit of it is leveraged as political pressure.

Hence, the Palestinians must work to abandon U.S. assistance as a vital strategic objection in the political status quo. A new emerging regional climate will help to achieve this goal. Part of this climate is thanks to Gulf attitudes, especially Saudi Arabia’s, which carries a strong pro-Palestinian stance toward membership in the United Nations. This view was recently expressed in the American press in two articles published by Prince Turki al-Faisal. The other thing is Turkey, which is an upward and strong supporter of the Palestinians. This is in addition to the Egyptian position, of course.

The Palestinian Authority should intensify its efforts with these three parties to achieve its two goals. I would like clarify a statement on these three: Egypt, the Gulf and Turkey have announced their support to protect the Palestinian diplomatically and politically in the face of American and European pressure. More importantly, the second objective is to ensure the support of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf — Turkey will do so in some form of joint annual aid to the Palestinians, no less than a half billion dollars in order to offset U.S. aid. Turkey has stated more than once that it is prepared to compensate for U.S. assistance in the event that it is halted, and then proceed from there. Reaching this goal requires, once again, intensifying the official and popular efforts of the Palestinians on this front.

All of this does not mean cutting ties with the United States, because it is not within the capabilities of the Palestinians to do so. Doing so will lead to the last round of this issue, as well as to a direct clash with the United States, which, on all fronts, would not be in their interest. The United States’ pressure on Palestine, as well as the control mechanisms it has used in controlling the Palestinians are now weakening. The decisions, goals and policies of the Palestinians must be embraced.