Aiming to be the deal of the century, the Trump Plan for achieving peace in the Middle East is presented as yet another attempt to reach an agreement between the Jewish and Palestinian peoples. Among the various peace proposals presented in recent years, we might highlight the plan launched in 2008 by then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as the most plausible. This proposal was one that Palestinian Authority President Abu Mazen said he would study, but Olmert resigned before a decision could be made. In parallel, the United States’ interest in the region materialized a few times prior to Trump’s current proposal: on one hand, with the 2000 negotiations under Clinton, and later in 2013, with the mediation attempt of the Kerry Plan.
The content of the nearly 200 pages of the Trump Plan can be divided into three parts. The detailed U.S. proposal begins with an extensive introduction in which the need for self-determination, security, and quality of life for Palestinians is emphasized, in an agreement that meets the legal aspirations of both parties. The next two sections focus on politics – which is the primary motivation for the Israelis – and economics – the main incentive for the Palestinians. The political proposal grants Israel control over borders, security, and the city of Jerusalem. Additionally, Palestinians would receive far less territory than in previous international proposals. In the case of Jerusalem, the plan envisions handing over peripheral neighborhoods to the Palestinian people, located outside the city walls. Palestinian citizens in Israeli territory would have the option to choose whether to become Israeli citizens. Regarding the refugee issue, a reparations mechanism would be established that does not grant the right of return. In any case, certain conditions would need to be met to return to Palestine.
The economic aspect, whose working lines began to be disclosed in June, bears some resemblance to the Marshall Plan from the 1950s in the United States. Raising fifty million dollars from around the world, the economic measures aim to boost and improve businesses, infrastructure, transportation systems, roads, and other material complexes in Palestine.
With four years ahead to deliberate on it, the Trump Plan’s greatest advantage is its promotion of peaceful territorial changes. However, Palestine would receive only 14% of the territory and a rather limited sovereignty. Its biggest disadvantage? Not recognizing the Palestinian narrative. With Netanyahu’s approval, as he seeks to pave the way for re-election as President, it remains to be seen what the long-term effects and implications of this new peace proposal will be.
Nicole Pretell
Communication Assistant, INCIPE
