Know the Facts
It is so clear that holdovers from the previous two administrations wrote Secretary Powell’s foreign policy speech, that we were surprised by two fundamental, huge, glaring, practically unforgivable MISTAKES of AMERICAN HISTORY/POLICY.
It is so clear that holdovers from the previous two administrations wrote Secretary Powell’s foreign policy speech, that we were surprised by two fundamental, huge, glaring, practically unforgivable MISTAKES of AMERICAN HISTORY/POLICY.
“The Middle East has always needed active American engagement for there to be progress, and we will provide it, just as we have for over half a century.” No, we haven’t. Aside from recognizing Israel in 48, we provided no leadership or military aid, and very little civilian aid for the first 20 years. The region was in the British sphere of influence until the early 1960s remember Suez? Only after 67 did we put any diplomatic effort into it, orchestrating UN Res. 242 (about which, more later) and beginning a serious military aid relationship with Israel. In 73, we supplied heavy aid to Israel and after the war we were engaged on our own.
That looks like 18 years, not 50+. And in those years, the biggest deals were done either without us, or to thwart us. Sadat’s 1977 visit to Jerusalem stemmed from panic over President Carters proposed US/USSR Middle East summit at the UN. Sadat had thrown the Russians OUT of Egypt after the war, and here was the President inviting them back. Yes, we did Camp David, but only AFTER Sadat had made the strategic decision to accept the legitimacy of Israel.
The Israel-Jordan peace treaty was cooked without us, formalizing King Hussein’s long-ago decision to legitimize Israel. We just hosted the party.
Even Oslo was cooked (for better or worse) without us. In fact, it can be argued that the US mucked it up (for lack of a more pithy term) by a) involving ourselves in the details, but b) not holding Arafat to the agreements he made in the original letter, while c) not letting Israel hold him to his commitments either. Oslo without us might have been far better than Oslo with us.
In each case, the ARAB side changed the status quo by legitimizing Israel, AFTER which, Israel could respond. This is the mechanism contained in UN Res. 242, which Secretary Powell missed when he said American policy would be, based on the core principles of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which are rooted in the concept of land for peace. Land for peace, as regular readers know, is not in there. The line he could have cited, because it really is there, is, Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.
That is the Arab obligation to Israel. Their failure to do that is the reason Middle East peace is so elusive. Only when Mr. Powell gets his history right is there any hope for real American leadership in the region or any reason for it.