The US played a particularly prominent role in the May 2021 mediation efforts, marking President Joe Biden’s first foray into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. After signaling for months that the issue was not high on the administration’s agenda, Washington was seeking a win, and wanted to be the one to broker the ceasefire. To achieve this, the US blocked three attempts by UN Security Council members to publish a statement during the fighting and was willing to face criticism on this by key international actors. This criticism was a price that Biden was uncomfortable to pay, as the American conduct in the Security Council contradicted his multilateral foreign policy approach, which speaks highly of cooperation with international organizations and US allies.

Biden nonetheless provided Israel with backing and additional time to continue its military operation against Hamas, at the same time while senior officials in his administration were critical of Israel’s operation (its destruction of the Gaza building housing foreign media outlets, for example), and were issuing statements using new language – that stresses the equal rights of Israelis and Palestinians to security, freedom and prosperity.

The US took the lead in mediation efforts and sought the credit. Biden, Secretary of State Blinken and Secretary of Defense Austin were in constant touch with their Israeli counterparts, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Hady Amr was sent on his first visit to the region The US proceeded with its mediation mission in consultation with Arab states. Blinken reported almost daily on talks with his counterparts in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Morocco and Qatar. As expected, Egypt was the US ally that eventually nailed down the ceasefire. Qatar, which played a key mediating role in previous rounds of violence, was more marginal this time, as was the UN envoy, who had filled the US vacuum during the Trump Administration. The EU failed, once again, to overcome internal dissent and speak in one voice.

The successful US involvement is good news for Israel. The American absence from Israeli-Palestinian mediation efforts due to the Trump Administration’s rift with the Palestinians, damaged prospects of peace and undermined stability. Biden’s success, for which he was quick to take credit in a special address from the White House, could serve as a springboard for significant American engagement in advancing peace. This round of fighting obviously helped the administration realize the need to appoint senior diplomatic representatives to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian issue, both from the US Embassy and Consulate in Jerusalem and from the State Department in Washington.

In his comments following the ceasefire, President Biden made two interesting points regarding his administration’s future policy. The first was that humanitarian aid and reconstruction of Gaza would be carried out “in full partnership with the Palestinian Authority (PA) – not Hamas.” This clearly suggests the US desire for increased PA involvement and influence in Gaza, and runs counter to Netanyahu’s persistent effort to encourage the split between the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, in order to weaken the PA and to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. It remains to be seen what impact this US policy will have on the arrangement between Netanyahu and Hamas that included Qatari payments to the organization.

Biden’s second point relates to his vision of the future. While he omitted to mention the term “two-state solution”, to which his administration is committed, he stressed both people’s “equal” rights to security, freedom, prosperity and democracy. This language has been used in several official statements since he took office, offering new parameters that deviate from the traditional discourse on a two-state solution (although they do not contradict or replace it) and reflecting the US commitment to the rights of both sides. Biden argued that “a genuine opportunity” has presented itself for progress in the Israeli-Palestinian arena, and expressed his commitment to seizing it. These remarks contradict the spirit conveyed in the initial months of his administration, which reflected grave doubts about prospects of a breakthrough in resolution of the conflict.

The latest round of fighting underscored the cost of the protracted diplomatic stalemate between Israel and the Palestinians. Peace supporters in Israel, the PA and the US should be encouraged by the US return to its mediation role. As Blinken is touring the Middle East, for the first time as Secretary of State, they should make clear to the administration that its involvement is welcome and necessary, and that it must now advance broader diplomatic moves toward Israeli-Palestinian peace, beyond its commitment to bolstering the ceasefire with Gaza.

הפוסט Israeli-Palestinian mediation: Welcome back, America הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

The early days of a new administration are an important period of organizing, learning and preparing. Patterns consolidated during this period impact the administration’s future course, and the mechanisms and principles adopted serve as the basis for policy and set the tone for the coming years.

Administrations have maximum power and enjoy abundant credit in their early days. That is particularly true for the Biden administration that also enjoys a majority in both houses of Congress, and which could make good use of this period to create a momentum for advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace. To that end, a Mitvim Institute task-team recommends the following policy directions:

1. Highlighting the importance of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Israeli-Palestinian issue has been marginalized in recent years on the international agenda, with global actors shifting to domestic concerns and more burning regional issues, and to the Covid-19 crisis. Despite the myriad of challenges it faces, the Biden administration must signal at the outset that it attributes importance to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and initiate declarations and steps attesting to its intention to restore the issue to the international agenda.

2. Renewing ties and building trust with the Palestinian leadership. The incoming administration must announce at an early stage the renewal of US ties with the Palestinian leadership and launch a high-level political dialogue. The renewed ties should walk back Trump-era measures by re-opening the PLO offices in Washington and the US Consulate in east Jerusalem, and resuming USAID assistance to the Palestinians and funding for UNRWA. The administration could also advance confidence-building measures vis-à-vis the Palestinians, such as promoting economic projects in Area C and assisting in alleviating the COVID-19 crisis. Declaring the return of the US to its traditional support of the two-state solution and opposition to settlements would also be of importance.

3. Emphasizing the US commitment to the two-state solution and formulating parameters for a final-status agreement. The Biden administration must declare its commitment to the two-state solution based on the 1967 borders and mutually agreed land swaps as its vision for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such a declaration would ratify the US commitment to international norms, the principles of international law and UN Security Council resolutions. At the same time, the administration should start formulating parameters for a final-status Israeli-Palestinian agreement, to serve as a clear framework for future negotiations and shape the domestic and international discourse. However, the administration should also weigh the challenges in such a move and carefully consider the correct timing and manner of unveiling such parameters.

4. Preserving the feasibility of the two-state solution and drawing red lines. The Biden Administration must ensure that the two-state plan is preserved as a feasible and concrete solution, blocking efforts on the ground designed to make it irrelevant. The administration will have to draw clear red lines against creeping annexation measures, expansion of settlements, legalization of outposts and Israeli construction in the E1 area and Givat Hamatos. At the same time, the administration could demand that Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) ratify their commitment to their previous agreements and maintain security and civilian coordination, while demanding that the Palestinians mount a determined campaign against terrorism, condemn terror attacks and counter incitement.

5. Leading multilateral steps, such as creating a new international mechanism and an incentives package. The Biden administration should lead the formation of an international mechanism for the advancement of Israeli-Palestinian peace. Such a mechanism could be based on the P5+1 model (which negotiated the Iran nuclear deal) or on the Quartet, with the addition of key Arab and European states. This mechanism should put together an international incentives package for peace and outline international parameters for resolution of the conflict. It could also serve as a platform for additional multilateral measures, such as forming regional working groups, harnessing regional organizations of which Israel and the PA are members and convening an international peace conference.

6. Leveraging Israeli-Arab normalization to advance the peace process. The administration should harness progress in relations between Israel and Arab states for the benefit of advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace. In doing so, it could integrate the states that have normalized relations with Israel into joint forums with Israel and the Palestinians, and into economic and energy projects in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In attempting to promote normalization agreements with additional Arab states, especially with Saudi Arabia, the administration could create a linkage to the Palestinian issue, inter alia by conditioning normalization on a halt of settlements’ construction and creeping annexation.

7. Improving the situation in Gaza and ending the internal Palestinian divide. The Gaza Strip is facing a harsh humanitarian crisis, beset by explosive tensions that could escalate into violent clashes at any moment. The US has consistently distanced itself from the issue, but the new administration must stop avoiding it and help advance a solution. The administration should advance plans and projects with international partners to improve the well-being of Gaza’s residents, on issues such as energy, border crossings and vaccines. The administration would also do well to increase its involvement in efforts to avoid clashes between Israel and Hamas, help the UN envoy’s efforts on this front, and seek to advance a long-term solution to the Gaza issue under the aegis of the PA.

8. Empowering pro-peace Israeli and Palestinian actors, including in the civil society. The Biden administration should advance dialogue and cooperation between citizens on both sides of the conflict. The administration should provide backing for pro-peace civil society organizations in Israel and the PA, including regular meetings of administration representatives with them, and seek effective implementation of recent legislation that aids organizations engaged in Palestinian-Israeli cooperation (Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Act). At the same time, the administration should appeal directly to various elements within Israel society in order to strengthen support for the two-state solution and promote a discourse on this issue, while working on the Palestinian side to stem the anti-normalization trend undermining joint Israeli-Palestinian activity.

9. Setting a constructive tone to relations with the Israeli leadership and public. The administration should shape relations with Israel in a manner conducive to the advancement of peace and creation of mutual trust. It should learn lessons from the Obama years regarding the relationship with Israel’s government and society, and pay attention to the tone and style of the discourse even when expressing criticism. The Biden administration could initiate public goodwill gestures toward Israelis, and display public expressions of sympathy for Israel, and at the same time present the government with clear demands on the Palestinian issue and set red lines.

**The article was published on The Jerusalem Post, 1 March 2021.

הפוסט How Biden should handle Israeli-Palestinian Conflict הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

Still, there are many things the administration can and needs to do, including in its early days, to advance Israeli-Palestinian peace. Indeed, the Biden Administration takes office at a time when the peace process is frozen and after four Trump years that distanced Israeli-Palestinian peace. However, this point in time also summons new opportunities to promote peace in the wake of the normalization agreements between Israel and Arab countries. There is also a sense of urgency to overcome the obstacles that keep accumulating every day, due to Israel’s deepening control over the West Bank, gradually blocking the path of achieving a two-state solution in the future. The new administration does not have the privilege of time, and if it will not roll up its sleeves now and act to promote peace, it could find itself in several months in a position where it will have to intervene to prevent escalation.

Washington’s expression of commitment to the two-state solution is important. So is its willingness to draw red lines and object to measures that would harm the prospect of achieving peace, and so is its intention to revive the relationship with the Palestinians in a way that will return the US to the mediator position it lost under Trump. Additional courses of action are needed beyond these moves, which have already been announced by senior officials in the first week of Biden’s tenure.

The administration must promote multilateral policy steps, together with European and Arab states, to revive peace efforts and establish a new international mechanism that will initiate and accompany steps to promote Israeli-Palestinian peace. The Quartet (consisting of the US, the EU, Russia and the UN) does no longer offer an appropriate response but it could be upgraded by adding more countries into the fold. Another alternative is to establish a new mechanism based on the P5+1 (the forum that negotiated the Iran nuclear deal). A new international mechanism could formulate and promote an international incentives package for Israelis and Palestinians, and establish regional working groups (similar to the model that began at the Madrid Conference in 1991).

The Biden administration also needs to leverage Israel’s new relations with Arab countries in favor of promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace. The administration could integrate these countries into joint forums with Israel and the Palestinians, and into economic and energy projects in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Additionally, the administration can link future normalization agreements, especially with Saudi Arabia, to the Palestinian issue by conditioning the normalization on stopping settlements’ expansion and the creeping annexation.

It is important that the Biden Administration acts to strengthen pro-peace activists on both sides and support civil society organizations promoting dialogue and devising joint policy proposals. In this context, the administration needs to effectively implement the law passed recently by Congress that grants extensive financial support for projects advancing Israeli-Palestinian cooperation. Also, the administration should not ignore the Gaza issue, and it needs to improve the situation in Gaza and prevent escalation in such a way that will empower the Palestinian Authority. The administration could also promote international projects, such as in the energy sector or in dealing with the Covid-19 crisis, that will improve the welfare of Gaza’s population.

The early days of a new administration are an important period of organizing, learning and preparing. Patterns consolidated during this period impact the administration’s future course, and the mechanisms and principles adopted serve as the basis for policy and set the tone for the coming years. Administrations have maximum power and enjoy abundant credit in their early days. That is particularly true for the Biden Administration that also enjoys a majority in both houses of Congress, and which could make good use of this period to create a momentum for advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace. The advancement of peace should not be delayed anymore.

The article was published on Modern Policy, 6 February 2021

הפוסט Biden, It’s Time to Promote Israeli-Palestinian Peace הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.

Mladenov was one of the most successful international envoys to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, gaining the respect and trust of both Israelis and Palestinians, as well as of regional actors and the international community. Mladenov repeatedly managed to prevent escalation between Israel and Hamas, clearly spelled out the obstacles preventing resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and provided consistent and meaningful support to pro-peace Israeli and Palestinian civil society organizations. Israel is usually concerned about non-American international involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but Mladenov’s tenure proved that the opposite is sometimes correct. Under President Trump, the US policy distanced Israeli-Palestinian peace and created tensions in the Palestinian arena, while the UN, which Israelis tend to vilify, was the one that prevented warfare and encouraged dialogue.

The UN has appointed special envoys at different stages of the Israeli-Arab conflict to mediate between the sides and advance peace, as it does in other conflict zones. The UN’s first appointed envoy to the Israeli-Arab conflict, Folke Bernadotte, was an active mediator during 1948 Arab–Israeli War but came to a tragic end with his assassination by the pre-state Lehi underground (Stern Gang). His successor, Ralph Bunche led the successful mediation in negotiations on the armistice agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors, which brought the war to an end in 1949. Bunche was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his role. Following the Six Day War (1967), the UN Security Council appointed Swedish diplomat Gunnar Jarring to advance peace in the region. Jarring shuttled between Israel and Arab capitals, especially Cairo, but his efforts did not yield results. Following the Yom Kippur War (1973), the US intensified its involvement in the diplomatic process and essentially monopolized the role of mediator both in the Israeli-Arab arena and subsequently in the Israeli-Palestinian one.

In the wake of the Oslo Accord (1993), the UN decided to appoint a Special Coordinator (UNSCO) to the Middle East peace process in order to monitor its implementation and help build the Palestinian Authority established under the terms of the agreement. The first coordinator was Norwegian diplomat Terje Larsen, who had taken part in the secret Oslo talks. The US played the leading role throughout most of the ensuing peace process, while the UN envoys, as well as those appointed by the EU, were secondary players who helped out to the extent possible.

The role of the UN envoy was always challenging and complex. The envoys lacked formal strong leverage and did not represent a state or a superpower with tools and resources to incentivize or sanction the parties. In addition, the position’s mandate and authority were unclear, and the envoys also had to contend with the deep suspicion and hostility toward the UN on Israel’s part, but also on that of the Palestinians. For example, in 2014 Israel decided to boycott UN envoy Robert Serry after Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman accused him of trying to funnel money to Hamas and called for his expulsion.

Against this backdrop, and despite the position’s innate structural weakness, Mladenov managed to play an important and significant role in the region. He became the sole player accepted and respected by all sides in the Israeli-Palestinian arena, from Israeli’s Prime Minister Netanyahu and hardliner Naftali Bennett to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar. In fact, Mladenov remained the only “responsible adult” vis-à-vis Trump’s policies and other international actors who lost interest in the conflict or focused on other conflict arenas.

While other incumbent international envoys (such as the EU Special Representative to the Peace Process) work out of their home countries and occasionally visit the region, Mladenov worked out of Jerusalem with the help of a skilled team of local and international diplomats. He became a key player in the indirect negotiation process between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, stepping in often at crucial moments to stem escalation. He did so working in tandem with Egypt and Qatar, despite the rivalry between these two Arab states. Mladenov also stepped in to fill the vacuum created by the suspension of security and civilian coordination between Israel and the Palestinian Authority this past year, helping to coordinate contacts on the coronavirus crisis.

Along with the declining international interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Mladenov was forced to sound the alarm bells at regular briefings to the Security Council and to draw up recommendations and urge action. His desire to maintain good ties with both sides did not prevent him from expressing a clear and loud voice calling at every opportunity for adherence to the two-state vision, leading broad-based opposition to the annexation plan, displaying empathy for victims on both sides and condemning activities by various parties to the conflict. Mladenov also chose to deviate from the classic diplomacy conducted solely vis-à-vis decision makers and held an expanded dialogue with Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations. He emphasized over and over the important role they play in advancing peace, participated in events they organized and conducted discussions and briefings with them.

However, while Mladenov recorded achievements with Gaza, peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority did not progress during his term. Netanyahu’s rejection of the two-state solution, Trump’s policies, difficulties within the Palestinian Authority – all posed obstacles to promoting peace and largely circumscribed Mladenov’s role to Gaza only. His successor, Norwegian diplomat Thor Wennesland will enjoy a better starting position.

Biden’s presidency is expected to revive the US commitment to the two-state solution, rehabilitate US relations with the Palestinian Authority, restore the US to its role of mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, and open the way to multilateral cooperation between the US and international partners. This will enable the new envoy to not only carry on Mladenov’s work relating to the Gaza Strip, but also to try and assume a significant role in coordinating and leading international moves, such as establishing a renewed international mechanism for the advancement of peace (to upgrade the Quartet, which no longer fulfills its designated task) and devising an international package of incentives for peace for Israel and the Palestinians.

*The article was published on Haaretz, 23 December 2020

הפוסט With Mladenov’s Departure, Who Will Prevent the Next War in Gaza? הופיע לראשונה ב-Mitvim.