We never would have expected that Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, would make such a brash proclamation. The United States has effectively given up on the idea of an independent Palestinian state. Yet his statements are completely consistent with longstanding US policy. This policy has long failed to honor such a commitment, regardless of which administration occupies the White House.
In a wide-ranging interview last week, Huckabee lamented how the US had behaved over the previous 60 years. He contended that these actions show an absence of true intent to create a Palestinian state. He underscored that this position is a manifestation of the underlying policy at play in the US, rather than just spoken promises. Continuing saga Former President Donald Trump first appointed Huckabee as envoy to Israel. This decision has drawn a lot of attention given Huckabee’s extreme positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Huckabee also asserted that “Israel has title deed to Judea and Samaria,” using terminology favored by the Israeli government. This formulation serves to underscore his vehement opposition to the notion of Israeli occupation. He was unambiguous in this stance during his trip to the West Bank back in 2017. He further questioned the necessity of a Palestinian entity within Israeli territory, asking, “Does it have to be in Judea and Samaria?”
Huckabee’s outlook is informed both by his evangelical Christian faith as well as his backing of Israeli settlement expansion. During his 2008 presidential campaign, he controversially stated, “There is no such thing as a Palestinian.” Yet his denial of Palestinian identity has earned him widespread condemnation. Many interpret his message to mean that his intention is to wipe Palestinians off the map, literally and politically.
Marco Rubio, as political analyst Yousef Munayyer pointed out, Huckabee’s comments just put into words what US policy has already shown over the years in practice. He remarked, “What makes Huckabee unique is that he is shameless enough to admit out loud the goal of erasing the Palestinian people.”
Khaled Elgindy, a scholar on U.S. Middle East policy, vehemently seconded Khalil’s assertion. Finally, he stressed that Huckabee’s administration would be committed to the idea of having a Palestinian-free homeland. As to Huckabee’s statements, Lange pointed out that Huckabee’s unique clarity represents a startling break from past officials who often shrouded these kinds of goals.
In his remarks, Huckabee commented on the improbability of a peaceful resolution without substantial changes in cultural attitudes, asserting, “Unless there are some significant things that happen that change the culture, there’s no room for it.” That claim only serves to amplify his disbelief that a viable Palestinian state ever could come to be.
Huckabee’s positions on these issues show us what Huckabee really thinks. It is a huge sign of the times – representing a fundamental shift in US Middle East policy. This change in position could have a huge impact on US diplomatic policy moving forward in the region. As envisioned, it would redefine the relationship between Israel and Palestine as well.