At each stop on President Trump’s recent visit to the Middle East—Riyadh, Jerusalem and Bethlehem—he reiterated his seriousness about moving forward on Middle East peace. The theme continued in his visit to the Vatican, where the Pope gave the President a small sculpted olive tree and told his guest: “It is my desire that you become an olive tree to construct peace."

Trump and Pope
Photo Courtesy of The New York Times/Evan Vucci

The success of the trip and the stated willingness by all parties to show good will on behalf of peace opens a window of opportunity, but likely only one. It is difficult to imagine a better alignment of leadership and will—and, frankly, a fear of disappointing him. If Trump does not keep up the momentum, he will not be able to simply return to it a year or two later. 

The Administration has offered little detail on what the next steps might be. One of the things that has doomed past efforts is moving into talks before forcing the parties to prepare the ground politically with their constituents. Israelis, Palestinians and key Arab leaders have political demons that they have allowed to grow and, in some cases, actively nourished. If they are not able or willing to contain these demons, any negotiation becomes an exercise in futility -- waiting for the process to end and returning to an ever-deteriorating status quo.

Before embarking on closed bilateral talks, an international conference or even terms of reference, it would be useful—and reasonable—to make a politically difficult “ask” of each of the parties. But it would require them to take risks, possibly including political realignments that would be more conducive to peace.  

For Israel, it could be a fresh, publicly articulated commitment to a Palestinian state as an end goal, with tangible action to curb settlements. Palestinians could affirm their commitment to a two-state goal, clarifying the 1988 formulation of Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security, while denouncing violence and taking concrete steps to end incitement against Israel.

The Arab Quartet could reaffirm its commitment to two states and normalized relations with Israel, as laid out in the Arab Peace Initiative. Further, it could make meaningful gestures in advance of a final agreement, as part of an agreed process of coordinated confidence building.

Trump has appeared reluctant to use the term two-state solution, deferring to a formula of “what both parties like.” If the Israelis and Palestinians do both commit to this goal, that would be a good time for the U.S. to reassert its own pledge.

These pledges would advance the cause of peace, even if this were as far as it went in the near term, by not foreclosing options and preparing their populace for an eventual deal.

The road to peace will be paved with political shifts, compromise and, more than anything else, leadership. The sooner that leadership materializes, the more likely there will be a real societal shift of the kind that will make peace possible.     

Related Publications

10 Things to Know: Biden’s Approach to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

10 Things to Know: Biden’s Approach to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Thursday, June 10, 2021

By: Ambassador Hesham Youssef

Coming into office, the Biden administration was clear that the Middle East would largely take a backseat in its foreign policy agenda. But recent developments in Jerusalem and the 11-day war on Gaza forced the Israeli-Palestinian conflict back into the forefront of international attention and revealed elements of the administration’s approach to the conflict. U.S. policy on the conflict has long been a point of bipartisan harmony, with more consensus than contention. The Biden administration’s emerging policy largely aligns with past administrations’ policies, with a few notable differences. But can this approach advance peace amid this protracted conflict?

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

Can Israel’s New Coalition ‘Change’ the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

Can Israel’s New Coalition ‘Change’ the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

Thursday, June 3, 2021

By: Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen

With minutes to spare before his mandate to form a coalition expired, Yair Lapid, the leader of Israel’s center-left Yesh Atid party, announced that he had formed a governing bloc. This announcement could usher in an Israeli government that, for the first time in 12 years, is not led by Benjamin Netanyahu. The down-to-the-wire negotiations befit the prior two years of Israeli political drama — with four elections held since April 2019. While this potentially portends a new, post-Netanyahu chapter in Israeli politics, it is unlikely that the ideologically disparate coalition cobbled together by Lapid —with Naftali Bennet, a hard-right politician, at its helm — will yield significant progress toward peace.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes; Democracy & Governance

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Amid a New Reality and a New Region

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Amid a New Reality and a New Region

Wednesday, May 26, 2021

By: Ambassador Hesham Youssef

Thirty years ago, the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference aimed to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict and initiated what we now think of as the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Three decades later, the world and the region have undergone tectonic changes, bearing little resemblance to 1991 when the Cold War came to a close. Yet, Israeli and Palestinian leaders are still dealing with their conflict as if it is business as usual. The time has come for them to take a more sober look at the global and regional trends that spell trouble for them and their peoples. Without such a reorientation from leadership on both sides, it is likely that there will be continued and escalating rounds of violence like what we witnessed this past month.  

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

10 Steps Washington Can Take After the De-escalation of the War on Gaza

10 Steps Washington Can Take After the De-escalation of the War on Gaza

Tuesday, May 18, 2021

By: Ambassador Hesham Youssef

In a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday, President Biden said he was supportive of a cease-fire amid the continued violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories. As ongoing Hamas rocket barrages and Israeli airstrikes add to the rising death toll, there are immediate, short-term measures needed to stave off more violence. But, a cessation of the current hostilities will not address the long-term issues that have prevented a resolution to the decades-long conflict. How can Washington break through the long-standing status quo that has stymied efforts to forge a peaceful settlement?

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Peace Processes

View All Publications