Muslim leaders call on world to recognise East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital

[webfact]

Muslim leaders call on world to recognise East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital

By Ali Kucukgocmen

 

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas attend a news conference following the extraordinary meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul, Turkey, December 13, 2017. REUTERS/Osman Orsal

 

ISTANBUL (Reuters) - Muslim leaders on Wednesday condemned U.S. President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and called on the world to respond by recognising East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine.

 

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, who hosted the summit of more than 50 Muslim countries in Istanbul, said the U.S. move meant Washington had forfeited its role as broker in efforts to end Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

 

"From now on, it is out of the question for a biased United States to be a mediator between Israel and Palestine, that period is over," Erdogan said at the end of the meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation member states.

 

"We need to discuss who will be a mediator from now on. This needs to be tackled in the U.N. too," Erdogan said.

 

A communique posted on the Turkish Foreign Ministry website said the emirs, presidents and ministers gathered in Istanbul regarded Trump's move "as an announcement of the U.S. Administration's withdrawal from its role as sponsor of peace".

 

It described the decision as "a deliberate undermining of all peace efforts, an impetus (for) extremism and terrorism, and a threat to international peace and security".

 

Leaders including Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Iran's President Hassan Rouhani and Jordan's King Abdullah, a close U.S. ally, all criticised Washington's move.

 

"Jerusalem is and always will be the capital of Palestine," Abbas said, adding Trump's decision was "the greatest crime" and a violation of international law.

 

Asked about the criticism at a State Department briefing in Washington, spokeswoman Heather Nauert said that despite the "inflammatory rhetoric" from the region, Trump "is committed to this peace process."

 

"That type of rhetoric that we heard has prevented peace in the past," she said, urging people to "ignore some of the distortions" and focus on what Trump actually said. She said his decision did not affect the city's final borders, which were dependent upon negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians.

 

But when asked whether East Jerusalem could similarly be recognised as the capital of a future Palestinian state, Nauert said that determination should be left to final status negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

 

"We're taking a position on how we view Jerusalem," she said. "I think it's up to the Israelis and Palestinians to decide how they want to view the borders - again final status negotiations."

 

Abbas told OIC leaders in Istanbul that Washington had shown it could no longer be an honest broker.

 

"It will be unacceptable for it to have a role in the political process any longer since it is biased in favour of Israel," he said. "This is our position and we hope you support us in this."

 

"PALESTINIAN CAPITAL"

 

Jerusalem, revered by Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, is home to Islam's third holiest site and has been at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for decades. Israel captured Arab East Jerusalem in 1967 and later annexed it in an action not recognised internationally.

 

The communique on the Turkish ministry website and a separate "Istanbul Declaration" distributed to journalists after the meeting said the leaders called on all countries to recognise East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine.

 

"We invite the Trump administration to reconsider its unlawful decision that might trigger...chaos in the region, and to rescind its mistaken step," the declaration said.

 

Iran, locked in a regional rivalry with Saudi Arabia, said the Muslim world should overcome internal problems through dialogue so it could unite against Israel. Tehran has repeatedly called for the destruction of the Israeli state and backs several militant groups in their fight against it.

 

"America is only seeking to secure the maximum interests of the Zionists and it has no respect for the legitimate rights of Palestinians," Rouhani told the summit.

 

King Abdullah, whose country signed a peace treaty with Israel more than 20 years ago, said he rejected any attempt to alter the status quo of Jerusalem and its holy sites.

 

Abdullah's Hashemite dynasty is custodian of Jerusalem's Muslim sites, making Amman sensitive to any changes in the city.

 

Not all countries were represented by heads of government. Some sent ministers and Saudi Arabia, another close ally of Washington's, sent a junior foreign minister.

 

Summit host Turkey has warned that Trump's decision would plunge the world into "a fire with no end in sight".

 

Erdogan described it as reward for Israeli actions including occupation, settlement construction, land seizure and "disproportionate violence and murder".

 

"Israel is an occupying state (and) Israel is a terror state," he told the summit.

 

"I invite all countries supporting international law to recognise Jerusalem as the occupied capital of Palestine," Erdogan told OIC leaders and officials.

 

Trump's declaration has been applauded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said Washington had an irreplaceable part to play in the region.

 

(Additional reporting by Daren Butler and Parisa Hafezi in Istanbul, Tulay Karadeniz in Ankara, John Davison and Nadine Awadalla in Cairo, Jeffrey Heller in Jerusalem and David Alexander in Washington; Writing by Dominic Evans; Editing by Catherine Evans, William Maclean)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-14

[fvw53]

The great question is if words will be followed by actions.

Edited December 14, 2017 by fvw53

[Emster23]

May I suggest US builds embassy right on top of East/West dividing line? One side would cover dealing with Israel, the other with Palestine. Make both sides happy or pissed off, depending on issue of the day

[Orton Rd]

Clinton, Bush and Obama ALL said Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, only Trump had the balls to do anything about it

 

 

[Enoon]

 

Nice to see "The Bonnie Blue Flag that bears a single star" in that line up.

 

 

[Enoon]

34 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Clinton, Bush and Obama ALL said Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, only Trump had the balls to do anything about it

 

 

 

And all of them, including Trump, pandering to domestic voters.

 

Trump is the only one who has lost so much support in office that they still feel the need to shore up their popularity, by this action,  with those same domestic voters.

 

The only one stupid, careless and selfish enough to start reading out the "launch codes".

 

Purely to massage his monstrous, destructive ego.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 14, 2017 by Enoon

[Morch]

4 hours ago, fvw53 said:

The great question is if words will be followed by actions.

 

Depend what counts as "actions". There will probably be a few diplomatic forays in the UN, UNSC and other international arenas. Whether or not successful remains to be seen, and will possibly be effected by other regional and global developments. The actual effects of such efforts is uncertain as well, and of course, provides a pretext for further intransigence from both sides.

 

In terms of outright violence, of course such rhetoric doesn't help, but the same is true of Trump's announcement. Stoking up the flames will not, I think, lead anywhere, though.

 

A good question would be if Abbas can find the testicle fortitude, domestic and international support for making meaningful unilateral moves. The standard reply would be that these are unlikely, but seeing as he's near the end of the road who knows.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Emster23 said:

May I suggest US builds embassy right on top of East/West dividing line? One side would cover dealing with Israel, the other with Palestine. Make both sides happy or pissed off, depending on issue of the day

 

Said before, I think the US does own/lease relevant property in Jerusalem. Under current conditions, I think it would be both illegal though (what with parts of the embassy being on no-man's-land or East Jerusalem) as well as an organizational nightmare.

 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Enoon said:

 

And all of them, including Trump, pandering to domestic voters.

 

Trump is the only one who has lost so much support in office that they still feel the need to shore up their popularity, by this action,  with those same domestic voters.

 

The only one stupid, careless and selfish enough to start reading out the "launch codes".

 

Purely to massage his monstrous, destructive ego.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neither Netanyahu, nor Abbas enjoy particularly high approval ratings as well.  It is a good point to bear in mind, that many foreign policy moves reflect or relate to domestic affairs and considerations. The same would be true of many OIC members chanting along - it's expected, and even if it ain't - can be used by domestic opposition or external rivals as criticism. Then there are those using such occasions to deflect or distract attention from other foreign policy issues (Iran and Turkey would be good examples).

[Morch]

 

In terms of what is realistically achievable on the diplomatic front (other than the standard fare) perhaps a UNGA resolution. Not one "reconsidering recognition of Israel" as Abbas bizarrely went on about, but possibly reaffirming or recognizing East Jerusalem as Palestinian, or even upgrading the Palestinian membership status. UNSC resolutions are less likely to be successful, even if it wasn't for the US veto right.

 

The actual (as distinct from PR/propaganda angles) positive or tangible outcomes of such moves is debatable. The likelihood of even such resolutions being binding or being enforceable is not great. What with other regional and international issues on the menu, "actions" would likely remain on the declarative level.

 

While it is currently popular to say that the US forfeited it's role as a mediator, and that an alternative one needs to be sought, there's little by way of actual candidates stepping up or being offered. If anything recent words by semi-relevant leaders conveyed a reluctance to be dragged into the quagmire. The fact that a mediator would have to be accepted on both sides, considerably narrows down the list. Could be a good time to reflect on sides' apparent dependence on mediation, and inability (or unwillingness) to discuss things bilaterally. Of course, there are good reasons for that, but still - makes the role of the mediator as central (if not more so) as the sides themselves.

 

So far, it would seem that other than implying international diplomatic campaigns and engaging in this or that rhetoric, everyone is in effect waiting for the Trump administration to present its fabled "ultimate deal" peace plan. That it most likely will be a disappointment (even if Trump skipped the Jerusalem recognition thing) is immaterial, as there is no alternate initiative, and not a whole lot of international willingness to invest in such.

 

It would be interesting to see how far Abbas will dare push the US. For all his talk, the PA is supported heavily by US aid. Other administrations would have been likely to overlook things, the main argument being that cutting down US aid to the PA might lead to its collapse - with either Hamas or general chaos taking over. Abbas probably banks on this, but with Trump at the helm, its quite a gamble. 

 

The OIC is usually up in arms (well, up in words, at any rate) when it comes to issues relating to Israel, and even more so if Jerusalem is mentioned. But the hyped rhetoric of the current gathering was dominated by Turkey and Iran, which set the harsher tone. This reflects their other regional considerations and issues - Erdogan is for any US bashing, what with the fate of the nuclear deal about to make a comeback, distracting attention from regional activities, and making Saudi Arabia lose credibility. Most of the other members either played along and/or used the occasions for similar, if not as prominent, purposes.

 

There is nothing in these statements which suggests a viable way of addressing or improving the current state of things. And that's perhaps one of the biggest problems of this conflict - sides, involved and semi-involved parties engage in a whole lot of mudslinging, fingerprinting, assigning blame, issuing condemnations and making bombastic announcements. Most of the effort and energy are spent in antagonistic ways, rather than trying to actually solve things or even avoid pointless conflagrations.

 

A point about something from the State Department comment. It is true that Trump's announcement, while wrong from many aspects did not quite say or even imply all the things riled against. Yes, there are "distortions" and yes, certain parties will ignore the actual details - but that would have been expected by any half competent administration. Not a sanctioning of the reactions or "distortions", but it's not like the White House and the State Department were unaware of who they are dealing with when going ahead with the announcement. A bit late for damage control.

 

[Krataiboy]

Yep, it's working already.

 

Kim Jong who?

[JemJem]

OIC is nothing but a group consisting of a bunch of hypocrites.

 

Have they ever condemned and taken any action regarding the human rights violations in some of the Muslim-majority countries ? Have they ever condemned and taken any action regarding the lack of democracy in many of the Muslim-majority countries ? Have they ever condemned and taken any action regarding the violence (Muslims against non-Muslims, Muslims against Muslims) in several of the Muslim-majority countries ?

 

I think NOT !

[Stargeezr]

I wonder if the US embassy will be built before that Mexican wall?    Maybe this is just more talk and no action from Donald the mouth.

Geezer

[Thechook]

Will the next President denounce Jerusalem as the capital?  Somehow I think not.

[LazySlipper]

Seems like tit for tat on the part of the mUSLIM leaders.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

I wonder if the US embassy will be built before that Mexican wall?    Maybe this is just more talk and no action from Donald the mouth.

Geezer

 

There was some groundwork done searching for possible locations, a bit after Trump was elected. Guess it was more dusting off older plans, and checking the status of relevant real estate owned/leased by the US or available on the market. Estimates based on how long it takes to set up US embassies in general, range between 2-4 years from the actual green light (which Trump's announcement is not). Doubt most US embassy personnel in Israel are thrilled about such a move. 

 

So while it may not be as imaginary as the wall, it will take a long time to materialize, if at all. The time frame could mean that it would be up to the next president to make a final call.