Sudanese politician: Official Arab and Islamic response to Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel is far from satisfactory

Former Sudanese minister, Ghazi Salah al-Din al-Atabani, has said that the Arab and Islamic response to US President Donald Trump’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is weaker than expected.

In an exclusive interview with Quds Press, al-Atabani – who is also head of the Future Forces of Change Alliance (FFC) and the Reform Now Movement in Sudan – said: “The US President’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is a very serious because it puts the entire region at risk of being divided.”

He added, “This decision challenges the international law and the UN resolutions and respects no single right. It is subject to many interpretations, all of which are disastrous for our life and our existence as a nation.”

He continued, “Such a decision should have inspired a bigger, stronger, more sustainable and lasting response.”

He added, “Such random decisions which do not comply with any legal are important  because if a risk-taker (Trump) decides to make policy to serve his interests without complying with international law, others will do the same.”Read More:

Read: Israel says it has destroyed a ‘significant’ Hamas tunnel from Gaza

Concerning the Arab foreign ministers’ meeting in Cairo yesterday, al-Atabani said, “The Arab foreign ministers’ reaction does not meet with US decision with sufficient the gravity.”

He also stressed that “If there is no sustainable Arab response, the Arabs’ enthusiasm will soon fade away, and they would have to deal with the given reality. This should not be reached. An Arab policy at the level of governments and peoples should be developed to reveal the truth and to enforce international law. Rapid situational responses should be avoided.”

He added, “There is a difference between the existence of the Arab power and the use of this power.” He also said, “The Arabs have significant bargaining power, if they were to unite on a simple list of sanctions which would be taken to reject Judaization, for example. This does exist, but when it comes to political will and actions that can be used, it becomes a continuous and sustainable matter.”

Al-Atabani pointed out that the US position seems to be rejected by the Europeans. He said, “The European position is different from the US … The Europeans say that the decision is invalid because it is hasty, and is not based on any international law.”