Many waters have been flowing in the Potomac River since the US Secretary of State launched Nixon's administration, William Rogers, on December 18, 1969, the outline of the Israeli-Jordanian arrangement, which implied the June 4, 1967, quo.

During the 46 years since the program was introduced, and until Donald Trump entered the White House, US governments, from Carter to Obama, have put forth countless ideas, formulas and outlines on which a Palestinian settlement was to be built.

With one exception (in Bush's letter to Prime Minister Sharon on April 14, 2004, in which he promised to recognize, as part of the permanent agreement, the new demographic reality created in the Occupied Territories after 1967), all other initiatives were enshrined in the June 4, 1967 withdrawal principle as the basis for the settlement.

And now, three years since Trump's inauguration, it has become apparent that this dominant paradigm has been pushed to the stage by a president, who has embarked on a new and unconventional path in his attempt to breathe life into the political process. Indeed, we have another, central link that is supposed to connect and link a previous set of moves, beginning with Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and later also Israeli Israeli sovereignty) and continuing his efforts to establish a US-backed inter-Arab economic envelope that includes a basket of incentives $ 50 billion for Palestinians.

At the center of the current outline stands American recognition of Israeli sovereignty in all settlements and the Jordan Valley. This is in tandem with a proposal for an exchange of land and the denial of the right of return. Furthermore, while recognition of Israeli sovereignty is immediate, the path drawn by the president on the way to the establishment of the Palestinian state is graded, requiring the Palestinian leadership to meet first a set of preconditions.

•••

As a businessman and entrepreneur, not like a professional politician, by conventional conventions, examples or conceptions, Trump is running out of the box again. Thus, in order to create new dynamics in the Israeli-Palestinian space, he bases his plan on a package of carrots and economic transformations, intended to compensate the Palestinians for agreeing to recognize the limitations of their aspirations, both in the immediate territorial plane, in connection with the right of return and in the character of the future Palestinian state.

Here is another expression of the White House's ability to unilaterally disengage from a rooted convention since the Six Day War, and to abandon the June 4, 1967 lines as a starting point for a settlement. What's more: In contrast to his predecessor Obama's approach, which saw in the Israeli-Palestinian settlement a prerequisite for advancing US goals throughout the region, the current White House began to formulate the agreement on the entire Middle East, with its moderate Sunni elements supposed to give it initial legitimacy and mobilize efforts to operate levers. Impact and incentives on Ramallah While not only is it not an early veto by the Sunni bloc over the new outline that contradicts previous plans for a settlement such as the Saudi Peace Initiative of 2002, there are signs of the willingness - if even quiet - of some of the key countries in this bloc to march together In the path outlined by the American bishop.

On this level, the impression is that the American bishop is fully exploiting the dependence of these actors, especially Saudi Arabia, in supporting his good will in the face of the challenges (in the center of Iran) they face.

In conclusion, even if the implementation of the century deal on all its components seems distant, the president's declaration of sovereignty has the potential for immediate implementation. In this respect, it can be seen as a transformational event that will shape a new reality, regardless of the fate of the other courses in the outline.