After writing last night’s post concerning the recognition of Jerusalem as a possibly shrewd move by Trump, along comes WaPo and makes it clear that he’s just trying to beat his predecessors – again. And without understanding what might happen:
Several advisers said [Trump] did not seem to have a full understanding of the issue and instead appeared to be focused on “seeming pro-Israel,” in the words of one, and “making a deal,” in the words of another.
Once Trump indicated 10 days ago that he would not sign a second waiver, national security adviser H.R. McMaster began putting together options that officials assessed would result in the least damage.
The debate came to a head at a White House meeting Nov. 27 to hash out the waiver issue. According to people briefed on the meeting, Trump repeated his earlier assertions that he had to follow through on his campaign pledge, seemingly irritated by objections over security and the break with previous policy.
“The decision wasn’t driven by the peace process,” one senior official said. “The decision was driven by his campaign promise.”
Chief regional allies including Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt — where senior government officials have said they still have little sense of the parameters of the broader peace plan being fashioned by the Kushner-led team — were not told definitively that the decision had been made until late last week. All have described the Jerusalem decision as a step backward in the peace process.
When Trump made contact with Arab allies ahead of his announcement, it was to notify them, not to discuss the matter.
According to Nabil Shaath, an adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Trump “just went on saying he had to do it,” despite the Palestinian leader’s fervent objections.
Ah, well. Sometimes, trying to see what others don’t results in exactly that.
