In a significant move, the Trump administration recently unveiled a comprehensive $50 billion economic plan designed to pave the way for Israeli-Palestinian peace. Spearheaded by Jared Kushner, senior adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump, this ambitious initiative sought to jumpstart the regional economy as a fundamental step towards resolving the enduring conflict.
The plan garnered a diverse range of reactions. While some viewed it as a promising opportunity for economic growth, others emphasized the indispensable need for a holistic political solution. Notably, the initial conference in Bahrain saw limited participation from key stakeholders, and the prospect of the two-state solution, which has been at the heart of previous peace plans, remained shrouded in uncertainty.
One of the central questions surrounding the plan was whether the Trump team intended to abandon the well-known “two-state solution,” which envisions the creation of an independent Palestinian state coexisting with Israel. This particular approach has received widespread international support, but the Trump administration had consistently refrained from committing to it.
Jared Kushner himself clarified in an interview with Al Jazeera TV that the Trump plan did not align with a Saudi-led Arab initiative that had long been the consensus for a settlement outline since 2002. The challenges ahead included addressing pivotal issues such as the status of Jerusalem, mutually agreed borders, Israel’s security concerns, Palestinian aspirations for statehood, and the fate of Israeli settlements and military presence in territories where Palestinians aimed to establish their state.
It’s important to note that the Saudi-backed initiative called for a Palestinian state with borders that predate Israel’s capture of territory in the 1967 Middle East war, a capital in East Jerusalem, and the right of return for refugees – all of which were points of contention for Israel.
Saeb Erekat, the Chief Palestinian negotiator, criticized Kushner, stating that he was committed to the initiatives of Israel’s colonial settlement councils. Meanwhile, in various regions, including Ramallah and Gaza, reactions were mixed, with some advocating for a political solution over an economic one.
The conference’s backdrop was heightened by ongoing tension between Tehran and Washington, along with their respective allies. All parties shared common concerns related to Iran. The response from wealthy Gulf Arab states, which were expected to show a concrete interest in the plan, remained a key factor in the initiative’s potential success.
While the path forward appeared challenging, the Trump administration sought to make a substantial impact on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through this economic endeavor. The success and long-term sustainability of this ambitious plan remained a subject of speculation.