“A US consulate in Jerusalem to a foreign body clearly runs afoul of American law,” says former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman.
By Ariel Kahana , News Agencies and ILH Staff
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Tuesday, May 25, 2021, in Ramallah | Photo: AP/Alex Brandon
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken pledged on a Middle East mission on Tuesday that Washington would advance the process of reopening its Jerusalem consulate for the Palestinians, although such a move would likely be legally problematic, according to three former senior diplomats who spoke to Israel Hayom on Wednesday and asked to remain anonymous.
The previous US administration closed the American consulate in Jerusalem in March 2019. The closure of the consulate was a harsh blow to the Palestinians and diminished the Palestinian Authority’s standing in Washington. During his campaign, US President Joe Biden had vowed to reopen it.
The move to reopen the consulate, however, appears to be in violation of Israeli, American and international law. Israel’s Basic Law: Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel (1980), stipulates that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.” Opening a diplomatic mission on behalf of a foreign entity could run contrary to Jerusalem’s status, as stated in Israeli law. Moreover, such a move would imply that Israel and the US recognize that Jerusalem will be the capital of a future Palestinian state – a position that many in Israel oppose.
Another legal obstacle to the move is the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, passed overwhelmingly by the US House and Senate, which recognized united Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and states that “Jerusalem should remain an undivided city.”
The building in Jerusalem that housed the US consulate to the Palestinians (Oren Ben Hakoon)
Former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, in an article that appeared in political news website The Hill on Wednesday, said: “A US consulate in Jerusalem to a foreign body clearly runs afoul of American law.”
Such a move, he argued, “would be illegal and unwise.”
Israel’s Foreign Ministry said: “Within the framework of the [current] dialogue, it was clarified to us that there is no intention of altering recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The matter will be discussed by the work groups between Israel and the United States.”
The US State Department said: “As part of our renewed involvement with the Palestinian people and leadership, we will examine our diplomatic presence on the ground to ensure it allows us to fully implement our various activities.”
The Prime Minister’s Office did not provide a response.
Blinken, meanwhile, also pledged new aid to help rebuild Gaza.
He said the United States would provide an additional $75 million in development and economic aid to the Palestinians in 2021, $5.5 million in immediate disaster relief for Gaza and $32 million to the UNRWA, the United Nations’ Palestinian aid agency based there.
“We know that to prevent a return to violence we have to use the space created to address a larger set of underlying issues and challenges,” he said. “And that begins with tackling the grave humanitarian situation in Gaza and starting to rebuild.”
Blinken reiterated that Washington intended to ensure that Hamas, which it regards as a terrorist organization, did not benefit from the humanitarian aid – a potentially difficult task in an enclave over which it has a strong grip.
He said if aid were distributed correctly it could actually undermine Hamas as the group “thrives on despair, on misery, on desperation, on a lack of opportunity.”
Blinken began his regional visit in Jerusalem, where he held talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli leader, speaking to reporters with the top US diplomat at his side, threatened a “very powerful response” if Hamas renewed cross-border rocket strikes.
In tandem with his visit, Israel allowed fuel, medicine and food earmarked for Gaza’s private sector to enter the territory for the first time since the hostilities erupted on May 10.
Chopping off 78% of the Mandate territory and making the Judenrein Transjordan out of it was illegal, too.
Throwing the French out physically and ending the French Mandate by force was illegal also.
All these “former” opinions are designed to do is to show the pretend freedom of speech and “resistance” but, ultimately, MIGHT MAKES RIGHT!
The Jewish media love to argue about the legality of things in the ME and usually it doesn’t matter one bit.
The laws do not apply to leftists!
@ Sebastien Zorn:
Remember, the Balfour Letter, and the San Remo Declaration were embodied in the Mandate, also vetter beforehand and approved by Woodrow Wilson, Also passed unanimously into irrevocable US Law by both Houses and immediately endorsed by 2 Presidents. And it was inherited and guaranteed by the UN, and is in THEIR Laws as well. so what does THAT prove. Irrecocable laws can be ignored by those who hold the power. This s not Democracy but Banditry.
Friedman is right. It’s illegal under US law. So is the resumption of aid to the PA. The elephant in the room I have not heard anyone address is: So what? When an administration which has both houses of Congress in its pocket breaks the law, what then? Let’s say, the Republicans get both houses back in 2022. What then? Is there redress in the courts? Which court(s)? Does it go to the Supreme Court? Who would have standing? Just how much weight do Congressional Acts have and is there any penalty or enforcement mechanism for breaking them? Impeachment aside, is passing a law no different from the party in power making policy which can be overturned in the next session? If this is the case, why should any country trust or rely on America when our word is clearly not our bond? If our promises aren’t worth the paper they are printed on, what then?
I’d rather hear that comment come from the IsraelI Government, than from a former ambassador. There are “former formers everywhere giving their “learned” opinions, which have absolutely have NO weight at atll, but fill in the vacant time slots on the multiple “news” channels, which unknown and poor hosts, are venturing out into very much lately.
Many are just too painful to listen to, twitching, gazing into the distance, at a loss for words, poor diction, worse delivery, and in general they won’t nake a hoped-for living from it.