The dangerous American decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem

Trump had promised it during the election campaign: the US embassy in Israel would be moved from Tel Aviv, the capital of the Israeli state, to Jerusalem. It was probably a debt to his campaigners' financiers or, perhaps, an attempt to make an effective gesture in a sector, that of international politics, which did not seem, and still does not seem to have, to have understood the complicated mechanisms and highly unstable equilibria from which it is characterized. About a year after the White House settlement, this decision had not yet been implemented: perhaps due to the most urgent issue of North Korea, perhaps due to a system of the composition of the American administration, which has more or less prevented until now , that the international inexperience of Trump, together with the disregard of the rules of international law, caused considerable damage, with almost certain repercussions on the world level. But now the time has come to keep the electoral promise: the US embassy in Israel will no longer be in the state capital, a unique case in the world, given that the maximum representation of a country abroad must be placed only in the capital of that nation. The question to ask is why exactly now is this decision to be implemented? The perception is that it can not be coincidental the concomitance of moving the US embassy with the attention of journalistic and world television stations on Trump's difficult moment on the involvement of Russia in his election. Trump and his entourage launch a real media bomb to divert attention, both internal and external, from developments on the investigation; this strategy, if truthful, denounces a serious state of difficulty, because it puts the United States in front of the responsibility of a possible worldwide upheaval, which risks dragging Washington into a very serious direct commitment. It seems superfluous to recall that at the present moment the concern of North Korea and its atomic capacity should have been enough as an international commitment. The story of Jerusalem, on the other hand, risks undermining relations with the Arab allies, such as Turkey, Egypt and Jordan, and encouraging the resumption of Palestinian terrorism on a large scale. An implication not to be underestimated is that Saudi Arabia, beyond a frontal attitude, will not interfere too much with the new ally, Israel, leaving the field open to an option for the Palestinian question on the part of Iran. If this factor were to occur, directly or indirectly, the confrontation between Sunnis and Shiites would be destined to register a dangerous escalation, which could be preparatory to the reopening of a Middle East conflict. The variables involved are different: one to consider carefully is the Islamic State, which, despite the military defeat is always close, could be recycled in style as a pure terrorist movement, ie without the ambition to exercise territorial sovereignty, at least for the moment, and to settle with the most extreme positions of the Palestinians, putting pressure on Israel and also in the United States with possible serious terrorist acts. The situation of the most extreme Palestinian militias risks becoming uncontrollable for a leadership that has not been able to prevent its symbolic city from assuming the symbol of the capital of Israel. The real risk is that the Palestinians accept the military help of anyone who offers it to them: they are the militias of the caliphate, that the Iranian forces or their allied militias. It could, in other words, create a state of affairs where subjects on opposite sides would be on common fronts and the target would become Israel. The scenario would be catastrophic for the peace of the entire world, if Tel Aviv were forced to commit itself to defend its borders and its internal peace and this would automatically involve the United States and the Western world. The danger of Trump in the White House becomes more and more concrete: all that remains is to hope that the federal investigation will lead to impecheament.