Geopolitical Update: US recognises Jerusalem as Israel’s capital – Why a Peace Deal is not unlikely

By Christian Takushi MA UZH, Switzerland – 6 & 14 Dec 2017.

A defiant President Trump announced on December 6th 2017 that the USA was finally moving to implement the US Congress Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995; formally accepting that Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Israel. President Trump fulfilled a major promise he made during his campaign; one that many US presidential candidates in the past made to gather votes, but one they probably never really intended to fulfil. President Trump withstood over 12 months of fierce opposition at home and growing threats by Arab, Muslim and European leaders over the issue.

Apart from elation in Israel and evangelical circles, the reaction from around the world is one of disbelief or anger. An overwhelming number of world leaders, political analysts and observers are joining the Arab world in their opposition to the move. The world’s uncontested superpower has formally said it is moving its US embassy to Jerusalem, to the historical center of power and worship of ancient Israel. Consensus is united in the conclusion that “President Trump has shattered the Peace Process”. 

I have promised to my readers that I would only write something if it deviates from consensus and it could be relevant. Today is such a day.

A path for a Peace Deal, but not for Peace

Our independent research shows that Consensus’ reaction and conclusion is understandable, but likely to be proven wrong. An unprecedented confluence of geopolitical, demographic, military, historical and religious factors could actually make a Peace Treaty more likely after this US move on Jerusalem. The rare convergence of an emotional & tragic 50th, 100th and 500th anniversary over the Middle East is adding momentum to a part of the Orient, where a circular-historical-religious worldview dominates decision-making. One needs to take a step back to look at the big picture and to gain some distance from one’s emotions and preconceptions. Too many analysts are sadly more concerned about shaping public opinion to advance justice or their ideological beliefs than presenting (what I call ..) the “raw” analysis and informing the public. Many of the same analysts told the Arab world this year “Trump won’t dare to do such a reckless thing. The threats and warnings have always worked”. While the consensus of political experts and media have rushed to decree the Peace Process as de facto moribund after the latest US move, our independent research shows that there is a path for a Peace Deal that is taking shape, albeit not lasting Peace.

We shall see a Peace Treaty take shape that a majority of Israelis and Palestinians – deep down – don’t want nor trust. The coming Peace Treaty will be engineered by the West and imposed on the conflict parties with enticements they will struggle to refuse. We predict that the coming Peace will be elusive.

After so many disastrous interventions, Western powers are once again about to interfere in the Middle East. Western leaders base their analysis on a linear-logical perspective of the Middle East, thus a flawed perspective. They genuinely want to bring peace to the region, but they lack deep understanding of the culture, history, politics and religion of the peoples involved. Many Oriental thought leaders have told me that Western leaders and analysts don’t even have an interest in who they are, their past and what really moves them – they simply want to get something done. The diagnoses being used by Western institutions might be very popular with Western media and academia, but Arab, Israeli and Iranian thought leaders acknowledge in private that these are flawed.

Being half Oriental and half Western myself, I see that most participants on the East and West side of this struggle are acting in good faith, but the real religious issues at stake are kept out of the light for different reasons. Not few Oriental thought leaders see Western leaders as arrogant, but many Oriental leaders themselves have contributed to the problem by not airing their true religious motives and goals. Very few in the West thus are aware of the fact that millennia-old prophecies are driving the Sunni-Shia conflict and the Israeli-Arab conflict. And these are just two of the many brewing conflicts of the Orient.

I have been warning for years that Religion is the most underestimated geopolitical factor of our time.

Ironically, both Trump (2017) and Obama (2015) lay the ground for a future Peace Deal and wars in the Middle East

I have written in March 2017 that my biggest concern about President Trump is his belief that he can strike a deal everywhere – even where no man has succeeded in 3’000 years. I sense since Summer 2016 that he won’t stop at Jerusalem. he wants to achieve the most impossible deal of all times. I think that just as Obama with the Iran Deal, Trump’s Peace Plan has good intentions, but both initiatives (Obama’s Iran Deal and Trump’s Peace Plan) lay the ground for two future wars in the Middle East. And our analysis also shows that most likely they won’t be conventional wars.

Our independent analysis of the Middle East Geopolitical Process and the US Political Process produced this conclusion in the early Summer of 2016 – and we still keep this main forecast:

1. The Trump administration is likely to comply with the Congress Act of 1995 and accept Jerusalem as Israeli capital, but the embassy may not be moved in years. Consensus is likely to get this wrong, because it is overly focused on Trump and misses the influence of 9 committed bible-reading Christians in the Trump administration that believe the bible on this issue (God has given the earth to the nations, but He has given the land of Israel – Canaan – with Jerusalem and Samaria as its heartland to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel as their inheritance).
2. After the recognition of Jerusalem as capital, a Peace Treaty for Israel-Palestine will become more likely. Trump-Kushner are likely to use their enormous popularity with Israeli leaders to force them to make bitter concessions to the Palestinians. Archeological developments and geopolitical shifts are likely to lead Israel to accept a Palestinian state in exchange for re-building the Jewish Temple (i.e. Third Temple). Arab nations may tolerate it, because it might surprisingly be built outside the old city and below their Dome of the Rock holy site. But some traditional and orthodox Jewish groups shall fiercely oppose it. Although a myriad of factors could derail such a Peace Treaty, we deem it likely. Should Donald Trump fail, a future President Pence or a Trump (one of Trump’s children, or someone that supported this historic move) is likely to finish the job and broker the Peace Treaty.
3. The coming Peace Treaty will be highly celebrated, even by consensus, but it won’t last. The US-Iran deal in connection with a Peace Treaty rather solidify the path for two wars in the Middle East. Trump or his successor is likely to force Israelis and Palestinians to accept a deal, they don’t really want. Both would like to have the land actually for themselves. Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia will do the rest. China, Russia and the USA will provide the military assets to their allies. The wars in Iraq and Syria are likely to simply be a prelude of what is to come. The Arab world remembered this year the 50th anniversary of the disastrous 6 Day War and the loss of Jerusalem to Israel. June 2017 kicked off a period of historical-religious relevance for Arab and Iranian leaders: reasserting influence over Jerusalem, the Middle East and Europe.
4. The future wars in the Middle East will pose the greatest security challenge Europe has faced since WW2 – They will also lead to severe economic implosions in Europe and China. Both highly dependant on exports for GDP growth and the security of Trade Routes. Their business model is vulnerable since they don’t have the military capabilities to enforce peace along the Trade Routes on which they so much depend. The EU actually dismantled its strategic military forces over the past two decades – a lack of strategic foresight. They have begun to rearm but it will take at least until 2024 to achieve effective deterrence – too late.

Western leaders should have been a bit more humble about what they think they know about the different peoples of the Middle East. Western leaders are more interested in what they can change in the Middle East, rather than understanding the different peoples of the region and desiring their well-being. Unaware of Oriental cultures and religions, Western leaders are still obsessed with treaties. 

The backdrop for this analysis is equally dynamic – the world is experiencing an unprecedented Global Convergence of multiple geopolitical and macroeconomic trends during 2017-2024.

We will nevertheless of course assess all new data & intelligence, and report to you if we change our assessment for the Middle East.

Christian Takushi, Macro Economist & Geopolitical Strategist, Switzerland – 6 Dec 2017 (full text released 14 Dec 2017)

Our broad approach to geopolitical research is distinct & independent

(a) All nations & groups advance their geostrategic interests with all the means at their disposal

(b) A balance between Western linear-logical and Oriental circular-historical-religious thinking is crucial given the rise of Oriental powers

(c) As a geopolitical analyst with a macroeconomic background Takushi does research with little regard for political ideology. In these highly politicised times, an advantage

(d) Independent time series data aggregation & propriety risk models – Independent thinking 

(e) We only issue a report when our analysis deviates from Consensus

Note: None of our analyses should be interpreted or construed as an investment recommendation 

Independent Geopolitical Research