Trump and Jerusalem: Light My Fire

Trump and Jerusalem: Light My Fire
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.
Mission accomplished? Palestinian protesters burn American and Israeli flags in Gaza City after President Donald Trump declares that Jerusalem belongs to Israel.

Mission accomplished? Palestinian protesters burn American and Israeli flags in Gaza City after President Donald Trump declares that Jerusalem belongs to Israel.

Musa Al Shaker / AFP

Hmm. What else could Donald Trump do to further roil world politics? I know, let’s have the U.S. — supposed arbiter of a Middle East peace process between Israelis and Palestinians that Trump was supposedly jump-starting via the huge efforts of super son-in-law Jared Kushner — break ranks with the rest of the world and recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. That would be the Jerusalem that is an ancient sacred center for not one but three major religions, seized by Israeli force of arms from the people who lived there in the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Arab-Israeli War of 1948.

Not at all surprisingly, Trump’s move has been met with a wave of bitter condemnation from the Arab and Islamic worlds, the fury of the Palestinians, and grave dismay and staunch disapproval from all international players, including our most important long-time allies, with the exception of tiny Israel’s government, the most right-wing in the history of the Jewish state.

Because of the Holocaust, America has a debt of honor to protect Israel, home to most of the world’s Jews. But that doesn’t require us to be stupid. Sure, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu thinks this is awesome. He also thought it was a great idea for the U.S. to invade Iraq, lobbying heavily in Washington in advance of that move, merely one of the greatest geopolitical blunders in world history. Why take Netanyahu’s views seriously?

So, what does Trump accomplish with this move? Does this help his purported desire to pull off “the ultimate deal,” i.e., a lasting accommodation for Israelis and Palestinians?

Nope.

Does it make the Middle East, already highly unstable, more stable?

Quite the opposite.

Does it stir up potential terrorists to attack the U.S., now that the White House has dropped the pose of equanimity in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute?

Yep.

But it does achieve some objectives.

First, of course, it pleases of Trump’s very big, but decidedly minority, reactionary base. Indeed white evangelical Christians, who form the core of that base — and provided more votes for Trump than African Americans and Latinos did for Hillary Clinton — are ecstatic about it.

They ought to be, since their leadership pushed hard for the move, as the Wall Street Journal recounts. Why? Because it’s a supposed biblical imperative, with the fundamentalist Christian God supposedly having given Jerusalem to the Jewish people.

It certainly might help hasten the “end times” so many evangelical Christians bandy about as prophecy.

It also distracts from Trump’s Russia woes, which, to be clear, are never, ever going away.

Unless there is a big Shout, of course. Or some other very loud set of noises.

Not that Trump, who is nothing if not a materialist, wants to end this world. He just wants to rile it up. A lot.

Distraction, I’m afraid, is only part of the agenda.

His legal advisors have been floating of late the very dubious legal theory that Trump is incapable of obstructing justice. Why? Because he is President of the United States.

Well, Richard Nixon thought that, at times. But it is precisely because he was caught obstructing justice that he was forced to resign from office just ahead of the impeachment mob.

So Trump counsel John Dowd doesn’t talk about Nixon when he says: “The President cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer and has every right to express his view of any case.”

But Trump defender Alan Dershowitz, who has been pushing this above-the-law notion since at least this past summer, does cite other presidents not named Nixon in support of his rationale. Namely Franklin D. Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson.

And Trump tweeted approvingly when Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor and ex-liberal lion, did just that on Trump’s fave rave cable TV show, ‘Fox & Friends.’

What do FDR, Lincoln, and Jefferson have in common? They governed during de facto states of emergency in times of national security and geostrategic crisis.

Of course, none of them were the subject of investigation for corruptly collaborating with a foreign adversary.

Not that Trump’s base believes that Trump did anything wrong, or cares if they do believe it. A new Poynter Institute survey shows that they thoroughly distrust the media and in fact back fascist media control policies.

Can a disciplined minority party run America?

Sure. In a state of emergency caused by national security and geostrategic crisis.

Just the sort of crisis that could occur with any one of the fires Il Duce Donald is lighting in Jerusalem and around the world.

Facebook comments are closed on this article.

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot