Daniel Shapiro, a former US ambassador to Israel, weighs in on the chances for success, but also on other aspects, including the proposal’s timing
The unveiling of the Trump Administration’s long-awaited plan to bring peace to Israel and the Palestinians has evoked varied reactions.
Senior officials in the Palestinian Authority are angry. The plan leaves them less territory than did previous peace proposals put forward by Israel, offers them little say on Jerusalem and nothing in compensation for refugees – which have been major Palestinian demands over the years.
Israeli leaders are clearly happy with the parameters of what President Trump once termed the “deal of the century,” seeing it as a green light to start the process of annexing West Bank land before there are even any peace talks. US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman said he agrees.
But Friedman’s predecessor, Daniel Shapiro, today a senior fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, sees things differently. The Media Line spoke to him about the US proposal, including how realistic it is, and also about its timing as well as its benefits for both US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
Daniel Shapiro, Part 1:
https://themedialine.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Daniel-Shapiro-Pt-1.wav [1]
Daniel Shapiro, Part 2:
https://themedialine.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Daniel-Shapiro-Pt-2.wav [3]