Answer to a Question

The American Policy on the Two Issues of Palestine and Iran

(Translated)

Question:

In the answer to the previous question, 5/2/2017, Trump’s general policy towards exploiting the “fruits“ of Obama’s policy in Syria were explained, especially the emergance of the powerful Turkish role in surrendering Aleppo to the regime, and towards reducing the Russian role, and America assigning a role to Britain in Syria. But there are two issues that were not mentioned although Trump’s statements were heated towards them! The American President Trump made statements in the press conference he held with the prime minister of the Jewish entity on 15/2/2017 in Washington regarding the two state solution saying that he does not insist on it, has America abandoned this solution? Also since Trump has resumed office on 20/1/2017 and his statements have been aggressive towards Iran and he escalated tensions towards it, is there a change in the American policy towards the Iranian role, after it was for the service of America in the region? Thank you so much.

Answer:

We will outline the two issues mentioned to find out the most probable opinion on them, by the permission of Allah:

First: The issue of Palestine or what they call the Middle East conflict:

1-  The text of President Trump’s statements as was reported in all the world and local media and as was broadcasted live, as follows:

"American President Donald Trump has written on Wednesday a new prespective in US policy towards the Middle East after he confirmed that the two-state solution is not the only way to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, pointing out that he was open to alternative options if they lead to peace. All the former American presidents have defended the two-state solution, whether Republicans or Democrats" (France 24 website, 16/2/2017) and Trump said,"I look at the two-state solution and the one state solution (...) if Israel and the Palestinians were happy, I would be happy with (the solution) they prefer, both solutions suit me" (Aljazeera Live website 16/2/2017),the resolution of a single state  mentioned by America for the first time  through Trump, he did not illustrate, does it means giving self-autonomy to the Palestinians inside the one Jewish state?! Or does it mean a secular state that the Palestinians share in the management of the Jewish state, which is similar to the English project introduced by Britain in 1939 when it brought out the White Book on Lebanon’s formula? Note that the two-state solution is the same American project introduced since 1959, the era of Republican President Eisenhower and it made the so-called international community accept and it discarded the one-state solutionintroduced by Britain. Whatever the case, what appears from analysing these statements and its indications is that America has not abandoned its two-state solution; the American ambassador to the United Nations Nicky Healy confirmed this, saying: "First and foremost, the two-state solution is what we support. Anyone he says that the United States does not support a two-state solution would be mistaken ... certainly we support the two-state solution, but we also think outside the box ... which is needed to attract the two sides to the table, which is what we need in order to make them agree" (Reuters, 16/02/2017).

This confirms that Trump did not abandon the two-state solution, which the US State policy adopted by all adminstrations since that date which we have referred to, but he wanted to try another way to put pressure, as his ambassador to the United Nations confirmed the confirmation of her country on the two-state solution but that it is considering the use of other methods or that there are modifications that America want to be carried out  on the two-state solution to be more attractive to the Jews. The Ambassador has stated that they are thinking outside the box which she likened the process in hand to and that her country placed both parties within the box to implement the solution, and now it wants to work in other ways and add or decrease other matters with regard to the solution to become attractive for the negotiators, especially for the Jews.

And the use of different methods is possible as we have mentioned in the answer to a question on 18/11/2016 about Trump's policy after the announcement of his victory that it will not change the essence of American politics, but the styles can change and we said, "as for the change of US policy on key issues in the era of the former president, the general outline, it is not expected to change, but the styles can change. The American system is controlled by different institutions, each with its own increased or decreased powers, for example the president and his administration, the Pentagon, the Congress, the National Security Council, and the security services ... and this affects the retention of the general outline of US policy almost invariable with a difference in styles.”

2- The Palestinian Authority was surprised and shocked, Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator with the Jews for a long time and secretary of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization  said: "We believe that undermining the two-state solution is not a joke, but a disaster and a tragedy for both Israelis and Palestinians" (Huffington Post, 16/02/2017) Erekat said: "The only alternative for the two-state solution is a single democratic state and equal rights for all Muslims, Christians and Jews." (Al-Jazeera, 16/02/2017) ... The Palestinian Authority (PA) and its henchmen only know the solutions offered by the Kaffir colonialists, if they do not adopt the US two-state solution then they will revert to the former English solution or something similar under the Jewish rule! It appears that America has not shown the PA and its henchmen its plans, they are the last to know and have no value to America, because America knows that they will subject and compromise, the one who waivers 80% of his land and agreed to be the guardian of usurpers and fights his own people in order to protect the enemy, is not deserving to be given any value, panting like a dog behind those who will throw him a bone!

3- As for the position of the Jewish entity, although it prime ministers h Netanyahu has praised the US President and his support of the entity, he did not mention anything about the two-state solution project in his joint press with Trump, this shows that he is not comfortable to statements made by Trump, as if there were things that have been asked of him, but he was not comfortable with and preferred not to address them so as not to disappoint his followers the Jews on Trump whom they have put high hopes on. ... and it seems that his demands were not met, and he did not want to show that: “Netanyahu was asked whether he had raised the issue of the Golan, he said: "Yes." And when he was asked about the response of the American President, Netanyahu said: “I would not say that he was surprised at my request,“and he did not give further details." (Reuters Arabic 16/2/2017)

Nor the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem as he promised during his election campaign, “Trump said on Sunday, that the telephone call with Netanyahu was "good," in a speech after the White House revealed that it is in the "early stages" of talks to implement the promise of the President to move the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, said in a statement, "We are in the very early stages in the discussion of this subject ", and he said there was no imminent declaration on the transfer of the embassy, ​​a move that will blow up probably anger in the Arab world. (Sky News Arabia 22/1/2017).

Netanyahu chose to focus on the fight against Islam that threatens the Jewish entity, he said: "The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed his readiness to help Washington in the fight against" radical Islam, "and to eliminate it" (Gulf Online 15/2/2017) They say ... "radical Islam "as a pretext and an excuse to fight Islam that Allah Al-Aziz Al-Hakim revealed to His noble Messenger (saw), Islam is Islam, which revives the state of the Ummah and it is the truth:

﴿فَمَاذَا بَعْدَ الْحَقِّ إِلَّا الضَّلَالُ فَأَنَّى تُصْرَفُونَ﴾

“And what can be beyond truth except error? So how are you averted?” [Yunus: 32]

Secondly, the issue of Iran:

Indeed, the Trump administration is escalating the tension with Iran, this can be seen clearly ... In order to realize the goals of the new US threats against Iran and its dimensions and extent it is necessary to review the US policy towards Iran before and after Trump to see if there has been a change and where:

The US policy towards Iran before Trump:

1- During the American war on Iraq, Iran used its full influence to stabilize the US occupation of Iraq, the loyal groups to Iran did not fight America at a time when the northern and western provinces were volotile in Iraq, which Iran does not influence, and coordination between America and Iran in Iraq at all levels, and implementation was taking place in full swing, and only the blind can not realize this ... as well as in Yemen, Iran is backing the Houthis, who America’s international envoys (the former, Jamal bin Omar and current, Ould Ash-Sheikh) are trying to consolidate their role  in ruling Yemen. They i.e. the Houthis had a meeting with the Foreign Secretary Kerry in Muscat in late 2016, even though they are like Iran; carry the slogans "the Great Satan", and "death to America". The Iranian role in Yemen is a perfectly supporting role for America.

And in Syria, the picture is clearer than the sun, Iran supports Bashar by its own army and its milichias, the US and the international coalition bombs the revolution in Syria, and it is not only limited to ISIS, but it bombs multiple groups and killed their leaders, all under the pretext of terrorism. The United States aircraft does not bomb the party of Iran, the Lebanese (Hizbollah) while militarily it is classified a terrorist. The Iranian role in Syria is part of the American policy. America-Obama signed the Iranian nuclear agreement in June 2015 with the international forces, and the United States want to ease restrictions and burdens and sanctions from Iran to be able to implement the growing demands of the US policy in the region, especially after the revolutions of the Arab Spring, and to enable Iran's oil exports and spending on US policy requirements in Yemen, Syria and Lebanon requirements. And so what he was heard from the US statements against Iran since the revolution in 1979, and more harsh Iranian statements against America, and calling it the "Great Satan" all this talk is meaningless, because the actions and executive policies that are fully coordinated between them reflects the truth more than the written statements and teadeous speeches, and the understanding of the policies depends on deeds and not just words.

2- The Obama administration has gone further than any other US administration since the Iranian revolution in unleashing Iran's hand towards the surrounding countries, there appeared what has become known as "the Iranian role" in Yemen and Syria as well as in Iraq and Lebanon, and to consider the extension of America and the large role given to Iranian, we find that that was driven by motives, including what was old and what is new in Washington, and it is as follows:

A. The old motives: to get Iran to increase its threat to the countries of the Gulf so that America can dominate the oil resources, and this old American vision of the role of Iran was to enable America to find a foothold in the Gulf, ie, where the oil wells are, but with Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, America found more reasons to station at the oil wells than “Iran”, for it was  able to exploit the invasion to set up military bases in most of the Gulf countries, thus the Iranian threats have faded due to the absence of the US need for it, in terms of the plan for the oil wells.

After the neo-conservative’s takeover in America during the Bush rule, the son, and the US occupation of Iraq in 2003, those old American motives have resumed in moving Iran, but this time at the level of sectarian incitement, this was according to the American plans in redrawing new borders of Sykes-Picot, by practically dismantling states on sectarian basis even if they remained established in form. America spoke about new maps of the Middle East, and Iran moved to support sectarian groups in order to create new borders drawn in blood of American sectarian maps of the Middle East. The sectarian borders emerged clearly as the sun in Iraq, then spread to Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and others, after Iran raised the slogan of "minorities" which it was implementing to protect minorities, which was the policy advocated by America. Here, the role of Iran emerged sharply.

3- With Saudi Arabia’s return to the embrace of America after the death of Abdullah,  loyal to Britain, and America’s agent Salman and his son taking power in Saudi Arabia in 2015, and Sisi’s assuming the presidency of Egypt in 2014 American agents in the region became stronger, and America founded the defense of its influence without Iran as well. This is on the one hand ... on the other hand, America saw Iran’s weakness, because with all its militias and the guards and support it could not to break the backbone of the Syrian revolution, this led America to bring on Russia to Syria, but Russia was not a substitute for the Iranian role, but a support to it. All this opened prospects in Washington to think about the diversification of its policy tools, and that the strong and almost only complete dependence on Iran was not effective.

With the approachment of Obama's second term to an end, the keys to the containment of the Syrian Revolution were gathering in Turkey, America combined the policy of eradication, "Iran and Russia" and the policy of containment, Turkey to break the backbone of the Syrian revolution, as well as the Saudi role to tame the opposition in Riyadh!

Thus, the Iranian role in the region is a carfully studied US policy, and this role expands and shrinks according to the US policy requirements and according to circumstances. Since 1979, America has been retaining Iran as a threat, with "a revolutionary Islamic cover" against the countries of the region, and then this expanded to the "severe sectarian threat" after the inauguration of the neo-conservative government in America, and then it became "a pivotal regional role," with its weight in the Arab Spring, but when strength returned to some of the other American agents such as in Egypt, or when the rule returned in its hand, as in Saudi Arabia, or when it was possible, it used Turkey; the United States finds other roles beside the Iranian role but without dispensing of it.

It is worth mentioning that the Iranian role in the region as other roles of American agents, do not represent a real influence for Iran or the other American followers, America increases or decreases those roles without even considering the interests of those countries ... For example, Iran spends extensively in Syria, nearly emptying its treasury and it neglects the dilapidated infrastructure in Iran, and it knows that America can put an end to its role in Syria when it no longer needs it! America embarrassed Iran dramatically in front of their followers whent it gave Saudi Arabia a role in Yemen. Saudi Arabia has appeared to provide direct military support to its followers, while Iran surrendered to the role of the Saudi Arabia and its control of Yemen, this dwarfed Iran of being just behind small boats that transport some arms to the Houthis. Perhaps in following up the Turkish role in Syria and the fall of the red lines and even change in the tone of its statements and positions, this shows how that the United States show no interest in these rulers, and it embarrasses and angers them without blinking! This means that America expands and contracts the roles of these followers continuously according to its own interests without showing concern for them.

The US Policy Towards Iran After Trump:

In this climate, i.e. America gave roles in the region for other regional countries than Iran, which are Turkey and Saudi Arabia, reducing Iran's role. In this climate Trump came to rule the White House, the US policy could have continued in the previous manner without noise towards Iran and the three regional states could have continued in America’s serve, each according to its given role. But Trump had wanted to move the Iranian bogeyman for economic blackmail in Mafia-style beloved by Trump, so he started to escalate tension with Iran, he attacked it via Twitter, calling it a sponser of terrorism, and accused it of threatening America and its allies, and showed aggressivness in dealing with it, and he imposed additional sanctions that affected 25 individuals and entities in Iran on 03/02/2017, after its missile experiment, and he described the nuclear deal with it as bad, and hinted at the possibility of reviewing and cancelling it, which means America’s withdrawal from it. Here, some people thought that Trump is making a great change in the American policy, but to understand Trump’s "new" vision towards Iran and its role and the extent to which Trump can go to with Iran, we review the following things:

1- The Republicans deliberate policy are to show of force and cruelty, and this is apparent in all the parameters of Trump's foreign policy, including the one on Iran.

2- Indeed, there is a new issue in America/Trump’s view of Iran! The background of this issue is that President Trump has promised to solve a lot of economic issues in America, he has demanded bluntly that the countries of world should pay for America in exchange for protecting them from the dangers, this included, Japan, Korea, and the countries of Atlantic Europe, and the rich Gulf countries not as an exception, but it is the easiest hunt. As it is mentioned from the old and new American motives, this gave rise to the gravity of Iran and its role in Gulf region, and that the Iranian bogeyman has become during the era of Obama a serious threat at the Gulf’s gates. President Trump wants to economically investment in this issue, and in the mafia approach, Trump wants to collect large oil royalties from the Gulf countries in exchange for putting pressure on Iran and reducing its role, and to protect those countries from the Iranian threats. Therefore, and with he US pressure on Iran, Iran experimented with new missiles, and it is possible that it is done in full coordination with the United States, and there is no coincidence in the timing, that is, it is to confirm its threat to the countries in the region, and without it getting any benefit in return, but the beneficiary is America, which request today a lot of money in return for the protection of  the rulers from the Iranian threat, and Trump's remarks during his election campaign confirms this vision, and from those statements that refer to Trump’s "new thinking"  are as follows:

A- According to CNN Arabic 19/8/2015: "Donald Trump calls for Saudi Arabia to pay money to America in return for protecting it  from extinction, he said," Saudi Arabia will be in big trouble soon, it will need our help ... if it wasn’t for us, it would have not been founded and would have not been able to exist”

B- Quoting CNN Arabic site (27/09/2016) Trump said: "We defend Japan, and defend Germany, and defend South Korea and defend Saudi Arabia, we defend a number of countries. They do not pay us anything for it (in return), but they should be paying us, because we provide them with tremendous service and we lose fortunes ... all I said is that it is highly likely that they did not pay their fair share ... they may have to defend themselves or they help us, we are a country that has a debt of $20 trillion dollars, they must help us." Trump stressed the importance of "the ability to negotiate trade deals", he commented: "You have to be able to negotiate with Japan and with Saudi Arabia. Do you imagine that we are defending Saudi Arabia? With all the money they have, we defend them, and they do not pay us anything?”

C- Aljazeera Web site, reported on 26/1/2017, "The US President said that Iraq possessed strength equal to Iran, but the United States made a mistake when it entered Iraq - a reference to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 - and then it handed Iraq over to Iran, pointing out that the US administration should have remained there and be in control of Iraqi oil." Reuters Arabic site also quoted on 24/01/2017 - in a speech to officials from the CIA, Trump hinted that the United States should have taken Iraqi oil to pay for the costs of the 2003 invasion.”

3- All of this confirms what lies in the mentality of Trump that is looking for dealmaking. In return for the US protection of the Gulf States from the Iranian threat, the Gulf States will have to pay the cost of such protection, i.e. to put its money more broadly at the disposal of America in order to maintain their chairs of governance. America is treating these rulers as jouvaniles. There are many evidences that prove the Mafia mentality that the Trump administration have, and President Trump is not the only one in the US that adopts an international royalties approach, the US Congress adopted JUSTA law in 2016 under the Obama administration, which as result it became possible to withold funds of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States because of "terrorist" acts. America is experiencing a real economic crisis that forced it to reduce its general budget, and with its huge debts, and the rise of China economically, they are always looking for big solutions, as the Bush Jr administration considerd the economic solution to be the occupation of Iraq and to invest its oil, but the resistance in Iraq prevented him from this, he was forced to spend $3 trillion for the Iraq disaster. Obama tried to hit the British tax havens to attract big money back from remote islands to America, then the JUSTA law followed to make money out of tax and penalise for "terrorism", and now Trump wants the world’s wealthy countries to pay international royalties to receive protection as a way to resolve the dilemma of the US economy, Trump ventured with his promise to solve the US debt (20 trillion dollars) in eight years.

4- The slogans raised by Trump "Let’s make America great again" requires the US direct intervention, and to reject Obama's policy of hiding behind roles given to others. The Trump administration’s statement of safe areas in Syria, it is aiming to restore America’s direct role, and to take it from Russia, and the great and terrible role given to Iran is also under review for the same reason, so the Trump administration is seriously considering reducing the Iranian role after the exhaustion of the economic purpose of that, but without totally disposing of it, but to make it a complementary role to the role of Turkey and Saudi Arabia and not a substitute for them,  it will not have the leading role especially in Syria, it is a declining role significantly in front of the Turkish role primarily then the Saudi role, but the Iranian role will remain in place to serve the US  plans; America will not dispose of this role in the region.

5- Thus, making a judgment on the issue of America changing Iran's role is not built on the statements and speeches as much as it is built on deeds, the uproar today about Iran in Washington, most of which does not amount to real change, for example (Iran's president, Hassan Rohani, announced in a speech delivered on the occasion of 38th anniversary celebrations of the Iranian revolution, that the Iranians will make the United States regret the language of sanctions. Rohani pointed out that the participation of Iranians in commemoration of the "Islamic Revolution" is a show of national force across the country, pointing out that this participation is a clear message  that answers to the erroneous statements of leaders in the White House” (Russia Today 10/2/2017). US President Trump answered him saying "watch out" “The US President Donald Trump called on Friday the Iranian President, Hassan Rowhani, to be warned after the media quoted Rohani as saying that anyone who threatens the Iranians will come to regret it. Trump said, "Watch out, that is best for you." (Reuters, 10/02/2017). These and similar statements about the nuclear deal fall within the boring record of the American-Iranian conflict ... As for the situation on the ground, it is one of coordination, cooperation and implementation of US plans, “Mugireny told reporters a day after conducting interviews with officials in the US President Donald Trump's adminstration, on February 9th: "based on what was said during those meetings, I have received assurances of their intention to commit to implementing the nuclear deal with Iran completely." (Russia Today 10/02/2017). The new US