عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Can Arab Efforts Pressure for a Two-State Solution?

Meeting on Palestine at the United Nations (Arab League)
Meeting on Palestine at the United Nations (Arab League)
TT
20
TT

Can Arab Efforts Pressure for a Two-State Solution?

Meeting on Palestine at the United Nations (Arab League)
Meeting on Palestine at the United Nations (Arab League)

At the 79th United Nations General Assembly in New York, Arab nations pushed for the implementation of a two-state solution. Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit said recognizing Palestine would lead to “fair negotiations” with Israel.

Experts told Asharq Al-Awsat that these efforts are a way to “pressure Israel and advance peace,” especially after Saudi Arabia formed a global alliance to push for the two-state solution.

On Thursday, a ministerial meeting at the UN, attended by representatives from Arab, Islamic, and European countries, discussed the Palestinian issue. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan announced that the first meeting of the alliance would take place in Riyadh.

Aboul Gheit outlined three key points during the meeting: taking concrete steps to weaken the Israeli occupation, increasing recognition of Palestine to enable equal negotiations, and stressing that peace can only be achieved by ending the occupation and creating a Palestinian state.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty called for an “immediate and lasting ceasefire in Gaza”, urging the international community to stop the attacks on Palestine, according to Egypt’s foreign ministry.

He noted that the crisis isn’t just due to the events of Oct. 7 but stems from years of Israeli actions to entrench an illegal occupation.

Abdelatty stressed the importance of granting Palestinians their right to freedom and establishing a viable independent state along the June 4, 1967 borders, in line with international law and the two-state solution.

The New York meeting was called by the Arab-Islamic Contact Group on Gaza, which includes Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Türkiye.

It followed a mid-September Arab-European meeting in Madrid, attended by Norway, Slovenia, the EU’s Josep Borrell, and Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Mustafa.

On his part, Prince Faisal called on all countries to “show courage” and join the 149 nations that already recognize Palestine. He stressed that the two-state solution is the best way to end the ongoing conflict and suffering.

Dr. Saad Okasha, an Israeli affairs expert at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said diplomatic efforts are key to advancing peace.

However, he told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel is unlikely to respond to international calls to end the war or recognize Palestine, especially as it is gaining militarily with US support.

He added that diplomatic efforts are usually more effective after the fighting stops, but they still play a role in preventing further escalation.

In support of the Palestinian cause, Aboul Gheit met with Argentine Foreign Minister Diana Mondino. He expressed disappointment over Argentina’s recent positions, which were rejected by Arab countries, and urged a review to avoid negative reactions.

In an informal dialogue with the UN Security Council and Arab leaders, Aboul Gheit warned that the region is at a critical crossroads. He urged the international community to take immediate action to stop Israel’s military operations and push for a fair solution based on the two-state model.

The “Extraordinary Arab-Islamic Summit” held in Riyadh last November assigned a ministerial committee to stop the war in Gaza and push for a serious peace process.

The committee has since engaged in talks with global leaders to help end the conflict.

Most Viewed

 
Features

The 911 Presidency: Trump Flexes Emergency Powers in His Second Term

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
TT
20
TT

The 911 Presidency: Trump Flexes Emergency Powers in His Second Term

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

Call it the 911 presidency.
Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors.
Whether it’s leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion.
An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump’s 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors.
The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress’ authority and advance his agenda.
“What’s notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,” said Ilya Somin, who is representing five US businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs.
Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it.
Growing concerns over actions
The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump’s strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there’s growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the US is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address.
“The temptation is clear,” said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. “What’s remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we’re in a different era now.”
Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy.
“It’s the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,” Bacon said of Congress’ power over trade. “And I get the emergency powers, but I think it’s being abused. When you’re trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that’s policy, not emergency action.”
The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority.
“President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions
Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports.
The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces “an unusual and extraordinary threat” from abroad “to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.”
In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on US soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the US economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression.
The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion.
Congress has ceded its power to the presidency
Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice.
Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The US Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals.
Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II.
Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump’s eventual veto.
“Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,” said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. “Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.”
Trump, Yoo said, “has just elevated it to another level.”
Trump's allies support his moves
Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump’s actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy.
“We believe — and we’re right — that we are in an emergency,” Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax.
“You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,” Vance said. “I’m not talking about toys, plastic toys. I’m talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I’m talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.”
Vance continued, “These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president’s emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance.
Similar legislation hasn’t been introduced since Trump’s return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency.
“He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there’s oversight and safeguards,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a “path toward autocracy and suppression.”