Last week, following intense negotiations between Likud and Hamas, Binyamin Netenyahu announced that 1,027 Palestinian prisoners would be released in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured by Hamas in 2006. The agreement was brokered by Egypt, who received a formal apology from Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak in reciprocation. This news was met with jubilance from citizens all over the Middle East as national heroes returned home and everyone saved face.
In the midst of all this behind-the-scenes diplomacy, one question must be answered – where was the United States? While the rest of the Middle East is finally engaging with each other without external influences from the US, the EU or Russia, the role of the United States as a main actor in the development of Middle Eastern relations should be reviewed. Is the United States still relevant, and even if it is, should it still play a dominant role in shaping relations in the region?
The deal that was made by Likud, Hamas and the transitional government of Egypt seems pretty fair. Out of the 450 Palestinian prisoners to be released in the first stage, 272 will be allowed to return to their homes in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Israel. Although the remaining 178 will be deported to other countries, the fact that Likud was willing to concede at all on the return of Palestinians to Israel, an extremely sensitive topic for both sides, shows some progress in the previously stubborn stance on repatriation. Meanwhile, Israel can finally welcome Gilad Shalit, who had become a symbol of the conflict with Hamas, back with open arms and finally diffuse right-wing Israelis who used him as a rallying cry to increase violence against the Palestinians. The transitional government of Egypt will also benefit as Israel’s apology will undoubtedly satisfy furious Egyptians who never accepted the country’s peace agreement with Israel.
This successful deal has proved that the countries involved in the Middle Eastern crisis are more than capable of negotiating amongst themselves without constant interference from the United States. On October 6th, Hamas’ Kahled Meshaal met with Egyptian intelligence chief in Cairo to discuss logistics related to the swap, during which time he thanked Egypt for playing a “historic” role in helping the movement for Palestinian statehood. Meanwhile, President Obama’s announcement that the US would veto the Palestinian bid for statehood has received almost universal condemnation. The fact that a provisional governing body of a country whose populace has always strongly opposed Israel, and has only recently emerged from revolution, has contributed more to peace than the US is a sign that diplomatic norms in the region are changing. As such, the U.S. needs to revise the way it conducts diplomacy.
Therefore, the U.S. needs to take a leaf out of China’s and Russia’s books when it comes to the Middle East. It needs to take less of an interventionist stance and leave the region’s affairs to the region to sort out. Obama’s statement at the UN calling for a Palestinian state created through negotiation with Israel through US brokering is unrealistic and naïve at best. Given the Obama Administration’s inability to deliver to the Palestinians on its promises of slowing down the construction of settlements, it is highly doubtful that Abbas’ team of negotiators will ever return to the negotiating table if a member of Obama’s administration is at its helm. This recent prisoner-swap deal has also proven the ability of the region’s players to advance themselves in a mutually beneficial fashion without reliance on the United States.
The US should also withdraw its Middle East role for its own sake. The US gives $3 billion worth of foreign aid to Israel every year, more than the amount of aid given to the entire continent of Africa per annum. An estimated additional $2 billion is given through military grants, many of which are used by Israel to buy weapons which have been used in the Gaza strip and in the second Israel-Lebanon War. While the US has always demanded little respect amongst Arab nations due to its unconditional support of Israel, this popular discontent has always been kept at bay by US-friendly dictators such as al-Assad and Mubarak. Now would be the best time for the US to show some distance from the situation given the region’s surge of democracy movements, which may be less willing to be friendly to the United States should they be successful.
However, the US cannot withdraw its influence completely. While many in the international community consider his promise to veto unacceptable, Obama’s point about negotiating with Israel in order to establish a Palestinian state is worth listening to. There is still significant tension between Hamas and Fatah, the two largest political organisations composing the Palestinian Authority. Following Netenyahu’s announcement, Palestinian Authority foreign minister Riyad al-Malki questioned the timing of the deal, suggesting that Hamas and Israel worked together to embarrass the Palestinian Authority. The cracks in the united Palestinian front will definitely reduce Palestinian negotiating power. Efforts by the US State Department to piece the two factions together should definitely be continued.
Likewise, the United States shouldn’t sever its links with Israel either. However, it should drop its approach of bribing Israel to concede a little and adopt an approach of putting its foot down to achieve a lot. Since Carter set up the peace deal between Egypt and Israel in 1979, the United States has used military contracts and foreign aid in an attempt to convince Israel to loosen its belligerence. Now though, the US government should start withdrawing its support in order to achieve more concrete concessions from the far right Likud party, who will be even less willing to change its aggressive policies than the previous ruling party, Kadima.
In conclusion, the time has not yet come when the United States has ceased to play an important role in shaping Middle Eastern politics. However, that time is clearly on the horizon and we must stop relying on the United States to create the roadmap to peace. These concerns should be left up to the Middle East itself.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.