Obama's activist Middle East policy
IT'S no secret that America's Middle East policy has always been one of support to, and protection of, Israel while cajoling the rulers of the region that are privately and diplomatically cozy with Israel. To both Israel and America, Iran and Syria are the two blots on the landscape.
The question is: Will Obama shift towards a fair resolution of the Arab Israeli issues?
There are indications that Obama is committed to a Middle East peace plan that (MEPP) includes the recognition of Israel by the Arab states in exchange for its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders. The plan is a 2002 Saudi peace initiative (SPI) endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the Israeli foreign minister. It would allow Israel to exercise a veto on the return of refugees expelled in 1948 while returning the Golan Heights to Syria, and creation of a Palestinian state with capital in East Jerusalem.
When Obama visited Israel and Ramallah last July, he told Palestinian Authority President, Muhammad Abbas: "The Israelis would be crazy not to accept this initiative. It would give them peace with the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco."
Before he took office, senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to give the SPI top priority. They asserted that it was the time to strike a deal, given that the Arab League countries were under mounting pressure from their citizens and the radical Islamic movements. Besides, if SPI was successful, Iran might be persuaded to slow down or even abandon its nuclear ambition.
To jumpstart the MEPP, Obama, on his second day as president and within an hour of the confirmation of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, visited the State Department and spoke before gathering of several hundred.
With Obama and vice president Joe Biden present, Clinton announced the appointment of two special envoysRichard Holbrooke for Afghanistan-Pakistan and George Mitchell for the Middle Eastto initiate diplomacy on the two most intractable national security dilemmas.
Both are widely acclaimed and astute negotiatorsHolbrooke, a former career diplomat, brokered the 1995 Dayton peace accords in the Balkans while former Senator George Mitchell negotiated the 1998 "Good Friday" agreement, and led a high-level commission on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in 2000.
Obama expressed his deep concern for the suffering and humanitarian needs in the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of Gaza. "Our hearts go out to Palestinian civilians who are in immediate need of food, clean water and basic medical care, and who've faced suffocating poverty for far too long," he said.
He emphasised that as part of a lasting cease-fire, Gaza's border crossings should be open to the flow of aid and commerce, with an appropriate monitoring regime. Relief efforts must reach innocent Palestinians who depend on them. He assured full US support for an international donor's conference to seek short-term humanitarian assistance and long-term reconstruction for the Palestinian economy.
He reiterated: "Lasting peace requires more than a long cease-fire, and that's why I will sustain an active commitment to seek two states living side by side in peace and security." He cited "constructive elements" in the 2002 Arab peace initiative and said "now is the time for Arab states to act on the initiative's promise."
Palestinians were ecstatic over the appointment of Mitchellremembering him well for his fair disquisition and firm recommendation for an end to Israeli settlement activity in his 2001 report. He proved not to be a pushover then, and was well liked by both sides. "He was tough on the Palestinians but tough on the Israelis too," Obama said.
Will Mitchell demand renunciation of violence and the commitment of both parties to achieve goals by "exclusively peaceful means?" Will he allow Hamasor at least its moderate political winga seat at the negotiating table? In many ways, the situation is more difficult than it was in 2001, said The New York Times in an editorial.
Mitchell will very likely be guided by three conditionsHamas recognises Israel, renounces violence, and abides by past agreementsimposed by Israel, the EU, and the US. Hillary Clinton reiterated these conditions in her Senate confirmation hearings and Obama mentioned them in his State Department remarks. However, it is unlikely Hamas would have much incentive to accept these conditionsbeing convinced that Fatah's acceptance of them ahead of securing enough payoffs was a blunder.
The Arab-Israeli conflict has entailed interminable human sufferings for too long. However, Obama learned one thing from the Clinton and Bush administrations' failed "final-year" peace pushes, said USA Today in an editorial. Every modern president gets embroiled in the conflict between Israel and Palestine eventually, so it's best to plunge in at the outset.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments