The joint press conference held by President Trump and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas after their meeting this week was spare of specifics, but abundant in atmospherics. Both leaders seemed intent on conveying the message that this is the start of a new chapter, and that peace—and the U.S.-Palestinian partnership toward that goal—is possible. 

Abbas and Trump
Photo Courtesy of The New York Times/Stephen Crowley

For Trump, this was an opportunity to underscore his seriousness of purpose in pursuing “the toughest deal to make.” For the aging Abbas, it was an effort to affirm his renewed relevance to domestic, global and regional players.

But if the meeting projected a sense of possibility, it offered no concrete next steps. There was no suggestion of renewed talks, and given the psychological and substantive gaps between the parties, this is prudent.

Instead, Trump noted that the U.S. can support efforts by the parties to reach a deal, and provided a thematic list of priorities: an enhanced  security partnership with the Palestinians, ongoing Israeli-Palestinian security coordination, a U.S. commitment to economic growth in the West Bank, and the fostering of an environment in which peace could thrive. These largely echo the areas of focus that emerged when former Secretary of State John Kerry took up the peace process in 2013, despite Trump’s efforts to distinguish himself from the previous administration. 

Yet to achieve an alternative outcome, the administration will need to tie these efforts to a clear endgame, and generate tangible improvements on the ground that suggest meaningful progress toward peace rather than cosmetic adjustments. On politically unpopular security cooperation with Israel, in particular, it will be important that the Palestinians see a benefit to their own security, rule of law, and economic development.

It will be similarly important that an economic focus not be seen as a substitute for a political process. The administration is off to a good start on this score, with Trump’s remarks seeming to emphasize that economic steps will be just part of the efforts to move toward peace.

The elephant in the room, of course, is Gaza, which got no direct play in the public remarks, despite the less-than-subtle efforts of its de facto ruling power, Hamas, to remind Palestinians, the U.S., and the international community of its relevance in the lead up to this meeting. Abbas aimed to speak yesterday for all Palestinians, but progress toward peace will elude the most robust efforts if the issue of Gaza’s growing humanitarian crisis and Hamas control are not addressed at the outset. This will require coordination not only with Abbas, but also with Israel and other regional players.

Trump, who said this week that he wants to prove the peace skeptics wrong, may have a chance to address this when he heads to Israel and Saudi Arabia later this month. Trump will need to show he can leverage the regional dynamics and reset relationships to produce incremental coordinated actions by all sides in a way that neither overpromises nor underwhelms.

Related Publications

Does the Trump Administration’s Israeli-Palestinian Plan Offer a Path to Peace?

Does the Trump Administration’s Israeli-Palestinian Plan Offer a Path to Peace?

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

By: Lucy Kurtzer-Ellenbogen

Yesterday, at an East Room gathering, President Trump, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, unveiled his administration’s plan to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As promised at the outset of his remarks, the approach represents a vision “fundamentally different from past proposals.” The event itself—with the plan unveiled by U.S. and Israeli leadership—presented a visual that underscored this difference, and the challenge this plan faces if it is to chart a course to peace.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2020: What are the Possible Paths Ahead?

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2020: What are the Possible Paths Ahead?

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

By: Ambassador Hesham Youssef

Despite tremendous effort exerted since the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a two-state solution, peace has been elusive. Today, there is a growing feeling among Palestinians, Israelis and the international community that the two-state paradigm may no longer be viable. USIP’s Ambassador Hesham Youssef examines the potential scenarios facing Israelis, Palestinians and the region as the stalemated conflict continues without progress toward two states.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All Publications