riff
Jose Jones
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2000
- Posts
- 10,348
America Can Persuade Israel to Make a Just Peace
April 21, 2002
By JIMMY CARTER
ATLANTA — In January 1996, with full support from Israel
and responding to the invitation of the Palestinian
Liberation Organization, the Carter Center helped to
monitor a democratic election in the West Bank and Gaza,
which was well organized, open and fair. In that election,
88 members were elected to the Palestinian National
Authority, with Yasir Arafat as president. Legally and
practically, the Palestinian people were encouraged to form
their own government, with the expectation that they would
soon have full sovereignty as a state.
When the election was over, I made a strong effort to
persuade the leaders of Hamas to accept the election
results, with Mr. Arafat as their leader. I relayed a
message offering them full participation in the process of
developing a permanent constitutional framework for the new
political entity, but they refused to accept this proposal.
Despite this rejection, it was a time of peace and hope,
and there was no threat of violence or even peaceful
demonstrations. The legal status of the Palestinian people
has not changed since then, but their plight has grown
desperate.
Ariel Sharon is a strong and forceful man and has never
equivocated in his public declarations nor deviated from
his ultimate purpose. His rejection of all peace agreements
that included Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands, his
invasion of Lebanon, his provocative visit to the Temple
Mount, the destruction of villages and homes, the arrests
of thousands of Palestinians and his open defiance of
President George W. Bush's demand that he comply with
international law have all been orchestrated to accomplish
his ultimate goals: to establish Israeli settlements as
widely as possible throughout occupied territories and to
deny Palestinians a cohesive political existence.
There is adequate blame on the other side. Even when he was
free and enjoying the full trappings of political power,
Yasir Arafat never exerted control over Hamas and other
radical Palestinians who reject the concept of a peaceful
Israeli existence and adopt any means to accomplish their
goal. Mr. Arafat's all-too-rare denunciations of violence
have been spasmodic, often expressed only in English and
likely insincere. He may well see the suicide attacks as
one of the few ways to retaliate against his tormentors, to
dramatize the suffering of his people, or as a means for
him, vicariously, to be a martyr.
Tragically, the policies of Mr. Sharon have greatly
strengthened these criminal elements, enhanced their
popular support, and encouraged misguided young men and
women to sacrifice their own lives in attacking innocent
Israeli citizens. The abhorrent suicide bombings are also
counterproductive in that they discredit the Palestinian
cause, help perpetuate the military occupation and
destruction of villages, and obstruct efforts toward peace
and justice.
The situation is not hopeless. There is an ultimate avenue
to peace in the implementation of United Nations
resolutions, including Resolution 242, expressed most
recently in the highly publicized proposal of Saudi
Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah. The basic premises of these
resolutions are withdrawal of Israelis from Palestinian
lands in exchange for full acceptance of Israel and
Israel's right to live in peace. This is a reasonable
solution for many Israelis, having been accepted in 1978 by
Prime Minister Menachem Begin and ratified by the Israeli
Knesset. Egypt, offering the greatest threat to Israel,
responded by establishing full diplomatic relations and
honoring Israeli rights, including unimpeded use of the
Suez canal. This set a pattern for what can and must be
done by all other Arab nations. Through constructive
negotiations, both sides can consider some modifications of
the 1967 boundary lines.
East Jerusalem can be jointly administered with unimpeded
access to holy places, and the right of return can be
addressed by permitting a limited number of displaced
Palestinians to return to their homeland with fair
compensation to others. It will be a good investment for
the international community to pay this cost.
With the ready and potentially unanimous backing of the
international community, the United States government can
bring about such a solution to the existing imbroglio.
Demands on both sides should be so patently fair and
balanced that at least a majority of citizens in the
affected area will respond with approval, and an
international force can monitor compliance with agreed
peace terms, as was approved for the Sinai region in 1979
following Israel's withdrawal from Egyptian territory.
There are two existing factors that offer success to United
States persuasion. One is the legal requirement that
American weapons are to be used by Israel only for
defensive purposes, a premise certainly being violated in
the recent destruction of Jenin and other villages. Richard
Nixon imposed this requirement to stop Ariel Sharon and
Israel's military advance into Egypt in the 1973 war, and I
used the same demand to deter Israeli attacks on Lebanon in
1979. (A full invasion was launched by Ariel Sharon after I
left office). The other persuasive factor is approximately
$10 million daily in American aid to Israel. President
George Bush Sr. threatened this assistance in 1992 to
prevent the building of Israeli settlements between
Jerusalem and Bethlehem.
I understand the extreme political sensitivity in America
of using persuasion on the Israelis, but it is important to
remember that none of the actions toward peace would
involve an encroachment on the sovereign territory of
Israel. They all involve lands of the Egyptians, Lebanese
and Palestinians, as recognized by international law.
The existing situation is tragic and likely to get worse.
Normal diplomatic efforts have failed. It is time for the
United States, as the sole recognized intermediary, to
consider more forceful action for peace. The rest of the
world will welcome this leadership.
Jimmy Carter, the former president, is chairman of the
Carter Center, which works worldwide to advance peace and
human health.
April 21, 2002
By JIMMY CARTER
ATLANTA — In January 1996, with full support from Israel
and responding to the invitation of the Palestinian
Liberation Organization, the Carter Center helped to
monitor a democratic election in the West Bank and Gaza,
which was well organized, open and fair. In that election,
88 members were elected to the Palestinian National
Authority, with Yasir Arafat as president. Legally and
practically, the Palestinian people were encouraged to form
their own government, with the expectation that they would
soon have full sovereignty as a state.
When the election was over, I made a strong effort to
persuade the leaders of Hamas to accept the election
results, with Mr. Arafat as their leader. I relayed a
message offering them full participation in the process of
developing a permanent constitutional framework for the new
political entity, but they refused to accept this proposal.
Despite this rejection, it was a time of peace and hope,
and there was no threat of violence or even peaceful
demonstrations. The legal status of the Palestinian people
has not changed since then, but their plight has grown
desperate.
Ariel Sharon is a strong and forceful man and has never
equivocated in his public declarations nor deviated from
his ultimate purpose. His rejection of all peace agreements
that included Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands, his
invasion of Lebanon, his provocative visit to the Temple
Mount, the destruction of villages and homes, the arrests
of thousands of Palestinians and his open defiance of
President George W. Bush's demand that he comply with
international law have all been orchestrated to accomplish
his ultimate goals: to establish Israeli settlements as
widely as possible throughout occupied territories and to
deny Palestinians a cohesive political existence.
There is adequate blame on the other side. Even when he was
free and enjoying the full trappings of political power,
Yasir Arafat never exerted control over Hamas and other
radical Palestinians who reject the concept of a peaceful
Israeli existence and adopt any means to accomplish their
goal. Mr. Arafat's all-too-rare denunciations of violence
have been spasmodic, often expressed only in English and
likely insincere. He may well see the suicide attacks as
one of the few ways to retaliate against his tormentors, to
dramatize the suffering of his people, or as a means for
him, vicariously, to be a martyr.
Tragically, the policies of Mr. Sharon have greatly
strengthened these criminal elements, enhanced their
popular support, and encouraged misguided young men and
women to sacrifice their own lives in attacking innocent
Israeli citizens. The abhorrent suicide bombings are also
counterproductive in that they discredit the Palestinian
cause, help perpetuate the military occupation and
destruction of villages, and obstruct efforts toward peace
and justice.
The situation is not hopeless. There is an ultimate avenue
to peace in the implementation of United Nations
resolutions, including Resolution 242, expressed most
recently in the highly publicized proposal of Saudi
Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah. The basic premises of these
resolutions are withdrawal of Israelis from Palestinian
lands in exchange for full acceptance of Israel and
Israel's right to live in peace. This is a reasonable
solution for many Israelis, having been accepted in 1978 by
Prime Minister Menachem Begin and ratified by the Israeli
Knesset. Egypt, offering the greatest threat to Israel,
responded by establishing full diplomatic relations and
honoring Israeli rights, including unimpeded use of the
Suez canal. This set a pattern for what can and must be
done by all other Arab nations. Through constructive
negotiations, both sides can consider some modifications of
the 1967 boundary lines.
East Jerusalem can be jointly administered with unimpeded
access to holy places, and the right of return can be
addressed by permitting a limited number of displaced
Palestinians to return to their homeland with fair
compensation to others. It will be a good investment for
the international community to pay this cost.
With the ready and potentially unanimous backing of the
international community, the United States government can
bring about such a solution to the existing imbroglio.
Demands on both sides should be so patently fair and
balanced that at least a majority of citizens in the
affected area will respond with approval, and an
international force can monitor compliance with agreed
peace terms, as was approved for the Sinai region in 1979
following Israel's withdrawal from Egyptian territory.
There are two existing factors that offer success to United
States persuasion. One is the legal requirement that
American weapons are to be used by Israel only for
defensive purposes, a premise certainly being violated in
the recent destruction of Jenin and other villages. Richard
Nixon imposed this requirement to stop Ariel Sharon and
Israel's military advance into Egypt in the 1973 war, and I
used the same demand to deter Israeli attacks on Lebanon in
1979. (A full invasion was launched by Ariel Sharon after I
left office). The other persuasive factor is approximately
$10 million daily in American aid to Israel. President
George Bush Sr. threatened this assistance in 1992 to
prevent the building of Israeli settlements between
Jerusalem and Bethlehem.
I understand the extreme political sensitivity in America
of using persuasion on the Israelis, but it is important to
remember that none of the actions toward peace would
involve an encroachment on the sovereign territory of
Israel. They all involve lands of the Egyptians, Lebanese
and Palestinians, as recognized by international law.
The existing situation is tragic and likely to get worse.
Normal diplomatic efforts have failed. It is time for the
United States, as the sole recognized intermediary, to
consider more forceful action for peace. The rest of the
world will welcome this leadership.
Jimmy Carter, the former president, is chairman of the
Carter Center, which works worldwide to advance peace and
human health.
