WSJ OK with moving embassy to Jerusalem

Relocation 'would merely acknowledge the reality that Israel will never give up Jerusalem in any negotiated settlement'.

Contact Editor
Guy Cohen,

Amb. David Friedman
Amb. David Friedman
INN:RinI

The Wall Street Journal sounded a surprisingly complacent tone Thursday in an editorial devoted to the Trump administration's plan to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

The Journal mocked the Washington political establishment's "panic" over Trump's apparent intention to honor his campaign pledge regarding the embassy's relocation.

Trump’s nomination of longtime adviser David Friedman as America’s next Israel ambassador "has triggered a media and diplomatic meltdown," the paper wrote. "Yet Friedman's main offense seems to be that he is unapologetically pro-Israel—a novelty after eight years of an Obama Administration that has mistreated traditional U.S. allies in the Middle East and Europe."

Contrary to the apprehension in Washington circles, the embassy's relocation "would merely acknowledge the reality that Israel will never give up Jerusalem in any negotiated settlement," the Journal opined, adding that it might even help matters by sending a message to the Palestinians "that their maximalist claims to Israeli territory are an obstacle to peace."

While Israel's Arab neighbors "might protest for public show," the newspaper estimated, the Arabs have strategic reasons for moving closer to Israel, with whom they share common enemies: Jihadists and Iran. The "symbolism" of the US embassy location will not supersede those interests, according to the WSJ, and if the move does block peace talks, "then there must not be much of an underlying basis for peace."








top