Article
Zaha Hassan
{
"authors": [
"Zaha Hassan"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Palestine"
],
"topics": [
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Diplomacy and Israeli Accountability: Multilateral Peace-making: The Framework, Scope, and Stakeholders
The history of U.S. mediation between Palestinians and Israelis is one in which Palestinians have had to first negotiate their agency, representation, and peoplehood.
By Zaha Hassan
Published on Jun 11, 2020
Source: Palestine Strategy Group
The history of US mediation between Palestinians and Israelis is one in which Palestinians have had to first negotiate their agency, representation and peoplehood. When political recognition finally came from Israel and the US, opening the door to peace talks, it was at a considerable cost to the Palestinian national cause. The US has used its influence as lone peace broker and superpower to alter the terms of reference for an agreement while providing political cover for Israel’s expansionist tendencies. In US policy parlance, settlements went from “illegal” under Carter to being on the cusp of official US recognition as Israeli sovereign territory today under Trump. The removal of the refugee issue from the negotiating table did not begin with Trump; it began with Clinton.
Both political parties in the US, whether in control of the White House or Congress, have consistently worked to constrain Palestinians in their ability to operate in the US, to advocate for their rights in international fora, and to receive economic support while negotiating for an end to occupation. The US has done this both acting alone and through its participation in the multilateral mechanism, the Middle East Quartet. Though support for Israeli policies are on the wane among the base of the Democratic Party, the political polarization within the US on Israel/Palestine means that there will not be a significant change in US policy in the near term....
This policy paper was originally published by the Palestine Strategy Group.
About the Author
Zaha Hassan
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Zaha Hassan is a human rights lawyer and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- The Board of Peace Plan for Gaza
- The Board of Peace and Funding for Gaza Reconstruction: On Whose Account?Article
Zaha Hassan, Charles H. Johnson
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What Would Need to Happen to Slow AI Development?Commentary
AI capabilities are moving fast. Most institutions—including governments—can’t keep up.
Anton Leicht, Scott Singer
- BIS in the New Age of Import ControlsCommentary
The Bureau of Industry and Security needs to adjust its focus and practices to maintain its position as the U.S. government’s primary champion of international technological competition.
Geoffrey Irving
- The UN Security Council Is Deadlocked on Climate. New Members Have a Path Forward.Commentary
They face an uphill climb, but they could draw on a strategy that other diplomats have used in the past.
Shana Tabak, Alejandro Martin Rodriguez
- The Speech Ursula von der Leyen Can’t DeliverCommentary
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is about to give her annual address on the state of the EU. Here’s what she won’t—but should—say.
Rym Momtaz
- Old Wine in New BattlesCommentary
It is improbable that Israel’s forthcoming elections will alter much in terms of how the country thinks about security.
Nathan J. Brown
