A diplomatic drama … but why was Pompeo really in Israel?

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s eight-hour visit to Israel last week had all the hallmarks of a cutting-edge diplomatic drama. At a time when most diplomacy is being conducted “virtually,” Pompeo landed in Tel Aviv exempt from the 14 day-quarantine required of all visitors, and stepped down from the plane wearing a patriotic striped face mask in the colors of the US flag. He was whisked straight away to a meeting with Israel’s most senior security and foreign affairs figures, among them Prime Minister Netanyahu, his presumptive deputy and defense minister Benny Gantz, presumptive foreign minister Gabi Ashkenazi, and Mossad’s chief Yossi Cohen.

This high level meeting, the fact that the swearing in of the new Israeli government was delayed to allow the visit, and the fact that this was Pompeo’s first overseas outing in nearly two months, gave his trip a sense of significance and urgency felt not only by the people of both countries, but also by all those in the international community concerned with the relationship between the two administrations, and with it the commonality of interests currently having one of its occasional hiccups over Israel’s ever-developing relations with China.

For Pompeo, the visit was an opportunity to sense the atmosphere among the new/old leadership of Washington’s closest allies. For 18 months, the US has had to deal with a government lacking popular support, not knowing who might be prime minister from one day to another, who would be the main coalition partners and the holders of key government positions, or what would be the country’s position on crucial issues for the US. This has made engagement between the two administrations more complex and increasingly tentative.

For such a brief meeting the agenda was jam-packed. The topics discussed can be divided between areas of cooperation, and issues that could lead to some contention or even friction. Item 1 was how best to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and stop its aggressive policies in the region; then came the new Israeli government’s intention to legalize annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank, including the Jordan Valley. Two further issues were collaboration on combating COVID-19, and — the most contentious for Washington — Israel’s ever closer relationship with China.

On no issue are the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government more closely coordinated and aligned with most of the rest of the region, especially the Gulf, than that of Iran’s threat to regional security and stability. Although the battle against the coronavirus is preoccupying Iran and Israel, diplomatic and military confrontation between the two has continued, including Israeli air raids in Syria. Iran may be on the retreat there, but its presence still poses a threat to Israel’s security interests, so raids against Iranian and Hezbollah assets are likely to continue.

While most observers quite rightly see the prospect of Tehran acquiring more military capabilities as detrimental to international security, they ignore the fact that Iran’s society and economy is suffering immensely from the coronavirus, even if its leaders are concealing the real figures and impact. This is undermining the regime domestically, and any international pressure may be more effective by leaving space for diplomatic engagement with a much weakened government. This was most certainly not the mood in the meeting between Netanyahu and Pompeo, and the latter reiterated at the end of the talks that the Trump administration and Israel’s leaders see a risk of Iran conducting terror around the world and continuing to execute its nuclear program, which Washington in cooperation with Israel and other regional powers is determined to stop by whatever means necessary.

If both countries are singing from the same hymn sheet on the Iranian predicament, the issue of annexing the West Bank, at least of parts of it, is more convoluted. Trump’s peace plan, or “Vision for Peace” as his administration insists on calling it, is perceptually flawed and practically unimplementable, and is likely to lead to further violence and Israeli oppression against Palestinians. It is disturbing that annexation of parts of the West Bank has now been enshrined, for the first time in Israel’s history, in a coalition agreement, and even more worrying that Pompeo referred to it repeatedly as “a decision that the Israelis will make,” and in line with international law.

He is mistaken and misleading on both accounts. International law regards the West Bank as occupied by Israel, so decisions on it should not be made unilaterally. No Palestinian leader will negotiate peace on this basis, and it is more likely to bring about the collapse of the Palestinian Authority. With Yamina, the party that represents the settlers and their interests and ideology, staying out of the coalition, it may be Washington that pushes for annexation while the Israeli government remains more cautious. Donald Trump’s slide in the polls just months before a presidential election means that he is tempted to appease Evangelist-Christian Zionists more than the Israeli government is interested in living with the consequences of annexation.

As Pompeo’s plane took off from Ben-Gurion airport, he left everyone wondering if there was more than met the eye in the hastily arranged face-to-face encounter in terms of concrete plans on any of the issues discussed. Or maybe the visit was more of a distraction cooked up to help his boss in the White House, whose lamentable handling of the coronavirus crisis is day by day exposing his shortcomings to all, including those who voted for him four years ago.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations at Regent’s University London, where he is head of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program. He is also an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. He is a regular contributor to the international written and electronic media. Twitter: @YMekelberg