The Middle East, that perennial graveyard of diplomatic ambition, has once again proved its capacity for farce. This time, the architects of chaos are not the usual suspects of failed states or religious zealots, but two men who style themselves as peacemakers: Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. Their latest collaboration, a supposed ‘Deal of the Century’, is less a blueprint for stability and more a recipe for permacrisis. And the British government, foolishly playing the honest broker, finds its painstaking efforts trashed by the very partners it trusted.
Let us be clear: the UK-brokered peace was no masterstroke. It was a fragile, incremental affair, built on the usual diplomatic blather about two-state solutions and mutual recognition. But it was, at the very least, a process: a messy, grinding mechanism that kept the temperature low. The Trump-Netanyahu gambit, by contrast, is a bomb thrown into a china shop. By unilaterally recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and endorsing annexation of the West Bank, they have done precisely what every sensible diplomat warns against: they have pre-judged the final status negotiations. The result is not peace but a permanent state of suspended conflict, where neither side can claim victory or accept defeat.
The term ‘permacrisis’ is apt. This is not a temporary spike in tension, but a structural condition where the normal rules of diplomacy are suspended. Netanyahu, desperate to outlast his corruption charges, has hitched his wagon to Trump’s maximalist agenda. Trump, equally desperate for a legacy beyond bankruptcy and impeachment, treats the Middle East as a real estate deal. The Palestinians, predictably, have been demoted from negotiating partners to a problem of ‘security’ management. The Arab states, who had slowly acclimatised to recognising Israel, now face a choice: abandon the Palestinian cause or lose American favour. Either way, the region calcifies.
And where is Britain? Once again, playing the role of the well-meaning uncle who arrives too late. Our Foreign Office has spent years building a veneer of credibility in Ramallah and Tel Aviv. It is now in tatters. The US and Israel have shown that they do not care for British sensibilities or, indeed, for any multilateral framework. The EU, as always, is a bystander. The UK, post-Brexit, is a diminished power, its moral authority a relic of empire. We can huff and puff about international law, but Washington will simply ignore us.
The deeper tragedy is intellectual. We have convinced ourselves that history ended in 1990, that liberal democracy is the only game in town. But the Middle East has always been a cyclical beast, swinging between empire and tribe, between crusades and jihad. Trump and Netanyahu are not aberrations; they are symptoms of a Western exhaustion. We no longer have the patience for patient diplomacy. We want quick fixes, grand gestures, and television moments. The result is a permacrisis that will outlast both men, leaving behind a scorched earth where even the concept of a two-state solution is laughable.
There is, of course, a way out. It is the same boring, unglamorous path that has always worked: sustained pressure, quiet back-channels, and a willingness to accept half-loaves. But that requires a kind of maturity that our leaders no longer possess. The British, having lost the plot of their own nation, are in no position to restore it to the Middle East. We can only watch, tut-tut, and wait for the next outbreak of violence. The only question is whether it will be called an intifada or a war. The answer, I suspect, will be both.
