Dear President Trump,
On behalf of the overwhelming majority of Israelis, I want to thank and commend you for the clarity and courage you have shown in stating both that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and therefore the Embassy of the United States should be moved there, in accordance with universal diplomatic protocol whereby nations locate their embassies in the capitals of other nations.
Contrary to the anxiety reflected in the predicted hue and cry from those opposing such a move, your decision greatly facilitates the possibilities for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
First of all, your clarifying decision honors the reality that exists in plain sight: Jerusalem is the God-given, historically time-honored and actual capital of Israel. Jerusalem has served as a capital city for the Jewish People, and only the Jewish People, whether it was in ancient or modern Israel. For the many years that the Jewish People had lost their sovereignty, Jerusalem lost its political status as a capital.
Your decision validates your desire to bring a fresh approach to a situation that has persistently defied resolution. With the can-do attitude of the successful businessman that you are, you have accurately assessed that a future Palestinian state with its capital somewhere other than Jerusalem could certainly be viable; a Jewish State severed from its capital, or any part thereof, could not.
Why should the United States create a political and moral equivalence between a highly successful beacon of democracy and tolerance, and a corrupt, authoritarian regime that foments hatred among its citizens?
Some have counseled you that recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital removes the US from impartiality. But frankly, the reverse has been true. Not acknowledging the commonsense reality that is in front of all of our eyes - that Jerusalem is indeed the capital of Israel - is to create a false equivalence.
Why should the United States, or any other freedom loving nation, create a political and moral equivalence between a highly successful beacon of democracy and tolerance, and a corrupt, authoritarian regime that foments hatred among its citizens, rather than trying to prepare them for the difficult work of building their own society?
This false equivalence gives impartiality a bad name. It represents the refusal to distinguish between the merits of the parties, and it is an abdication of the kind of leadership that your decision evidences.
Removing the issue of Jerusalem from the table does not prejudice the prospects from any negotiations, but rather focuses them on other issues where compromise might be more realistically achieved. It is a way of assisting the parties to face realities, rather than to hold on to unrealistic pipe dreams.
Ironically, you have done the Palestinians a favor by requiring them to focus on the reality that they are not a mirror image of Israel, that if they are serious about achieving statehood, they will have to take into account the relative reality that they themselves helped to create.
As we look around the region today, we are seeing developments that 10 years ago would have sounded fantastic, worse, ridiculous. And yet today, we are seeing many of Israel’s traditional adversaries approach it with a new pragmatism, a realistic sense that it is not Israel that is threatening them, but another Muslim country, Iran.
Your decision must be seen in the context of this new reality, and the opportunities it might portend. Those opportunities are made possible when we see more clearly, more accurately, and with less reflexive reliance on modes of belief that have not succeeded.
Again, thank you for taking a palpable step towards a better reality in our region. All people who share a desire for a peaceful resolution between Israel and Palestine should echo my gratitude.
Yours,
Douglas Altabef
Chairman of the Board, Im Tirtzu