Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Regional Players Key to Salvaging Peace Process

Some experts think the Obama administration may be the last chance the Middle East has for achieving a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

(Inter Press Service)

One of the biggest foreign policy challenges facing the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama will be reinvigorating what looks like a completely stalled Palestinian-Israeli peace process.

Repeated failures in the struggle for peace make clear that a change in direction is needed. And many observers think that taking advantage of the Arab Peace Initiative put forward by the Arab League in 2002 is just the ticket to jump-starting the process.

A push by President George W. Bush in the final year of his two-term presidency yielded the Annapolis process which, though it made minimal procedural gains and brought in regional players, largely ignored the existing Arab proposal spearheaded by then-crown prince and now King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

The Annapolis track ended up failing to meet its own goals of having an agreement signed by the end of Bush's time in office.

The failure leaves Obama and the United States with the task of jump-starting the oft-troubled process. Many close observers of the conflict see some hope for the peace process, but even the optimists think that Obama's tenure in the Oval Office may be the last chance for a two-state solution.

"This next administration may well be the last administration that could realistically pursue a two-state solution," said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli negotiator, at a conference at the New America Foundation. He was encouraged that Obama had mentioned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a top-three foreign policy priority when announcing his national security and foreign policy team.

If Obama truly looks to tackle the long-burning Middle East conflict early in his term, he appears to have the support of the Arab League to use the proposal.

"I don't think the new president has to invent anything new," said Prince Turki Al Faisal Al Saud, a member of the Saudi royal family and former ambassador to Washington, on December 2. Al Saud laid out a number of positive steps from previous peace plans that could be selectively farmed, among them, the Arab Initiative.

"The Arab Peace Initiative created in 2002 is also on the table," he said. "It's up to the next president to do what is necessary. And he has raised a lot of expectations, particularly in our part of the world."

Al Saud isn't the only player in the Middle East who supports the initiative.

"There are more and more voices from the region making the case for the Arab Initiative as an organizing principle," Levy told the Inter Press Service (IPS), saying that one of the reasons that Bush's Annapolis plan had failed was that it ignored the Arab League's proposal.

The Arab Initiative is an appealing proposal to many proponents of the peace process because it represents the idea of resolving regional tensions with other Arab nations at the same time as creating a viable Palestinian state.

"I see the Arab League Initiative as incorporating all the other [peace processes]," M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum told IPS. "Under its auspices you still have negotiations and [U.N. resolutions]."

But precisely because the initiative comes from the Arab League and is signed by 22 Arab countries, it offers special incentives.

"It's more like a symbolic rubric to achieve peace with the whole Arab world in one swoop," said Rosenberg. "The thing that makes the initiative unique is that it's not just offering peace, it's offering normalization [of relations with Arab neighbors]. That's something that the most idealistic Israeli never dreamed of."

Another reason that Obama may turn to the initiative is exactly because so many other attempts at peace have stalled or failed.

"[The Arab Initiative] is the only game in town," said Naomi Chazan, a longtime Israeli peace activist and former deputy speaker of the Knesset, at the New America Foundation. Chazan pointed out that the Oslo Accords had failed, been retooled, and failed again, and that the half-hearted and late Annapolis process had never really taken off to begin with.

She said the initiative provides "an element of hope" and that as an Israeli, she, too, was particularly excited at the prospect of normalization.

And the initiative could bear other fruits as well. Levy said it could provide an avenue for Western interests like Israel and the United States to approach and deal with Iran. Chazan, an activist, mentioned that the initiative would open up the doors of the process to civil society to deal with, for example, the issue of Palestinian refugees in neighboring Arab countries.

Another and perhaps more important element of working through the Arab Initiative could be the reunification of the Palestinian territories—currently divided after armed hostilities between Palestinian factions.

"Building on a divided Palestinian house," Levy has said many times, is not a good recipe for creating a Palestinian state.

Egypt, an Arab league heavyweight, is already moderating discussions between the Fatah and Hamas factions, but using the initiative to put the full weight of the Arab world behind Palestinian unity would facilitate this important step, said Levy.

Doing so would "regionalize the solution," he said, a mantra he borrowed from Chazan's presentation that both speakers on repeated often at the conference.

But the unique opportunity to utilize broad-based Arab support for a peace process, like the two-state goal of the process itself, may be fleeting.

"The first and second time they put it on the table, the Israelis and Americans ignored it," Rosenberg told IPS, referring to the "amazing offer" of normalization.

"I think if Obama doesn't do something and push the Israelis to act on it, the moment will be lost forever," he said. "It's hard to imagine some president after Obama will pursue this if Obama doesn't."

Rosenberg, for his part, thinks it's likely that Obama will take up the Arab League on its offer.

"He approves of the initiatives, but that doesn't say anything," said Rosenberg, noting that nothing is certain until Obama takes office and starts making official decisions. "My feeling is he's going to go with it."

Ali Gharib writes for the Inter Press Service and PRA’s Right Web (https://rightweb.irc-online.org/).





Citations

Ali Gharib , "Regional Players Key to Salvaging Peace Process" Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2008). Web location:
https://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4970.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share