The Arab Peace Initiative: What Obama Should Do

The Palestinian Authority, in a brilliant display of public relations, ran Hebrew-language ads this week, in Israel's four major newspapers, endorsing the Arab Peace Initiative (formerly known as the Saudi plan) and calling on Israelis to support it, too. The Palestinian Authority is also urging President-elect Barack Obama to put his prestige behind the initiative as a critical first step to help end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The British media claims that President-elect Obama has endorsed it, but these reports are false. The British media has always been rather dodgy when it comes to issues relating to the United States.

I wish it were true. And I hope Obama does endorse the initiative early in his term. But he hasn't yet.

One of the stellar accomplishments of the Obama campaign's Jewish outreach
team was its ability to prevent the candidate from taking stands on specific Israeli-Palestinian issues--leaving him with maximum flexibility.

That is not why he received almost 80 percent of the Jewish vote. Jewish voters do not cast their votes with the Middle East foremost in their minds. Nonetheless, the campaign's studied ambiguity probably helped deliver some key precincts in battleground states like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Nevada.

The campaign is over and governing time approaches. The new administration will soon have to decide how to proceed. One thing is certain. It has a stronger hand than any new administration in recent history. It won in a landslide; Obama is the first Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote since Lyndon Johnson. His party controls both the House and the Senate. And Jewish voters are in his corner.

So where should he start?

He should start by endorsing the Arab Peace Initiative--the best offer the Arabs have ever made to Israel.

Forget what some Israeli officials and Jewish organizational types say about the Arab League plan. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. I say that because every provision in it requires the agreement of both Arabs and Israelis. So what if its language on borders presupposes full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-'67 lines? So what if it contemplates the return of more refugees than Israel can handle? Or that it envisions the full return of East Jerusalem to the Palestinians?

None of that matters because the language of the Arab Initiative represents the maximum Arab position, an opening position. The Saudis (and the other Arabs) are not saying "take it or leave it." They are saying, "let's negotiate."

In fact, to avoid misunderstanding, the reference to the return of the refugees--the most controversial part of the initiative--specifically refers to Israel's agreement. It calls for the "achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem agreed upon (my emphasis) in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194." Could anything be more clear? A solution to the refugee problem would not be imposed on Israel; it would have to be accepted by Israel.

That is true of everything in the initiative. In fact, it specifically states that its provisions are derived from UN Resolutions 242 and 338--the U.S.-drafted resolutions (endorsed by Israel) that call for direct negotiations to end the Arab-Israeli conflict on the basis of land for peace.

Of course, 242 and 338 have not resolved the conflict. This is in large part because, until recently, the Arab world was not ready to accept Israel's right to peace and security while Israel refused to accept Palestinian rights. Even after 1993, when the Palestinians and Israelis exchanged mutual recognition, the Arab world as a whole remained steadfast in its refusal to accept the presence of a Jewish state in its midst.

But now Israel accepts the Palestinian right to statehood in the West Bank and Gaza. And the Arab Peace Initiative offers Israel not just acceptance, but also full recognition and normalization of relations with the entire Arab world.

The initiative states that following successful negotiations, every single Arab state will: "(I) consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region, and (II) establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace."

So why is Israel dragging its feet rather than accepting the plan and starting to negotiate? The reason is, almost surely, the settlers. It's always the settlers!

No peace plan is going to permit a few hundred thousand Israeli settlers to remain in the West Bank--settlers, who have no intention of leaving. For instance, this weekend some 20,000 settlers (and their supporters) are descending on Hebron to defend their right to remain in a Palestinian home they seized. The army will ultimately move to evict them, but the militants say that the Israel Defense Forces is the enemy and that they will fight them. Past experience has demonstrated that they will attack the IDF soldiers who are ordered to move them. (In fact, attacks on soldiers began yesterday.)

This whole business of attacking soldiers is hard for an American to fathom. In the 1950s and 1960s, Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson all had to send in troops to break the back of segregation in the Deep South. The segregationists were every bit as entrenched as the settlers--and they were armed--but once the president sent in the troops, resistance collapsed. Americans do not physically attack their own soldiers. Besides, the U.S. show of force was so overwhelming that the segregationists understood that they were beat.

What's wrong with Israel? Has the occupation so degraded attitudes toward the military that settlers feel that they can spit on them, throw rocks at them, or worse, and get away with it? Talk about democracy run amok.

That is not America's problem. Our problem is to resolve a conflict that harms American interests throughout the Muslim world, and has done so since 1967. Perhaps the American interest hurt most of all is Israel's long-term prospects for survival.

Time is running out. The Arab Peace Initiative presents an unprecedented opportunity. Obama should run with it.

MJ Rosenberg is the Director of Israel Policy Forum's Washington Policy Center.

Comments

[baffy]

I agree with almost everything you say. However, Israel has no incentive to do anything. For quite a while now there have been virtually no Israelis killed in confrontations with Palestinians (although many Palestinians have been killed). Israel's economy has been booming and, with exceptions, most Israelis have been enjoying an affluent lifestyle. There is also very little criticism of Israel's oppressive treatment of the Palestinians. Settlements ("legal and illegal) continue to expand and the fence/wall gets longer and longer. Hamas is under seige in impoverished Gaza. In other words, the status quo suits Israel very well. Why embrace a peace agreement that might mean concessions?
This is why (soon to be) President Obama must take a much more even handed approach to the 41 year old tragedy that continues to exist. In recent times, there has never been a better opportunity for the USA to show the world that we are committed to freedom and fairness for all.

[darthdarcy]

For my money what Obama should do is....

Nothing....often the best thing to do...!

Especially in the Middle East...

[betz55]

If Mr Obama is really interested in "change" we can believe in then he needs to "change" the same old rhetoric, and dogmatic, unquestioned, unconditional support of Israel. Level the playing field and be an honest broker of the "change" he is espousing. Obama is no fool but it sounds like AIPAC is doing their best to bias Obama to be an Israel firster.

I will be proud of the day when the President can put the interest of America before the interest of Israel and not be crucified for it. It's a shame that American politicians are selected, not on their commitment to the best interests of America, but by vowing to put the interests of a foreign nation, Israel, first. The oath of allegiance that I said everyday in school was not to Israel, or any country but America.

A true "friend" of Israel would tell them they need to end the occupation of the West Bank, stop repressing the legitimate national aspirations of the Palestinians, and stop warmongering. The time has come for the US to stop pandering to Israel and it's destructive, belligerent, failed policies.

Israel 'preconditions' for "peace" are outdated, irrelevant, and biased towards Israel. Why is Israel allowed to lay waste to every international law and convention without criticism and their "enemies" -read Iran,Syria, any one against Israel's failed policies are not entitled to raise a hand in their own defense without raising Washingtons hackles? I hope Obama smartens up.

[xxnounxx]

Mr rosenberg
your article is 100% correct ,if peace is to be embraced
but unfortunately,nothing will change at all.
obama chnage was just dreams to get where he is and go down in history as the first black man to become president,,and thats where it stops.

[HansB]

Wonderful article. But I'm afraid Obama won't follow this sound advice. He'll stick to the (short-term) safe road of blaming the powerless Palestinians for everything, all the time. And with Clinton responsible for foreign policy, truly nothing positive can happen. Her record on Israel-Palestine, in fact on the entire Middle East, is terrible.

The last US president who was slightly less than 100% biased towards Israel was George Bush Senior. But by now it seems that both the US and Israel have reached political consensus on a quiet final solution: slow-motion ethnic cleansing. Already most Palestinian Christians have left. Over time, the rest will follow, if they can find countries to take them. They have no choice, now that even massive child malnutrition fails to shock the world. If even a handful of them react violently to oppression, all of them suffer disproportionate collective punishment. If they foreswear violence, settlement activity and expropriation of Arab land go up, as has always been Israel's answer to Palestinian quiet.

It would take a really courageous and principled US president to turn things around. I'm a big admirer of Obama, but on foreign policy his position seems to be, give it to the hawks.

[1dogs2]

Do you think you could wait until he takes office to judge President-Elect Obama's mideast policies? Have you forgotten President Clinton's extraordinary efforts to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace? But for Arafat's self-proclaimed fear of assassination if he agreed to the plan then under discussion, it could have happened. Has it occurred to you that one of the reasons Obama wants Hillary Clinton as his SOS is that she may provide him with some political cover against AIPAC and similar extremists? Do you suppose there is any foreign policy goal that Obama and both both Clintons want more than an end to Palestinian-Israeli hostilities and bloodshed? Give peace a chance, for heaven's sake.

[Bluedrgn]

As near as I can tell "slow motion ethinic" cleansing as you put it, is as far as I can tell, why there are so few Jews or Christains in Muslim nations. Though not outright exterminated or persecuted they are not treated a citizens with equal rights under the law either. Which diffinetly encourges conversion to Islam... then there is the fact that if a Muslim converts to Christianity or Juedism they are put to death...

[xxnounxx]

Oh my god i really feel sorry for you bluedrgn..honestly i do
you have just made yourself a laughing stock of inteligent people who are knowlegable.
i know jews in lebanon and syria who refuse the 10,000 dollar bribe isreal tries to buy them with to move to occupied palestine ( isreal)
iran has a jewish member of parliment who reresents the 40,000 iranian jews who refuse to abandon their country iran
in damascus there are many syrian jews who live like everyone else in equality
one of the ministers in bahrain is a christian
if you mean saudi arabia,then you can compare it to the vatican,where muslim and jews are n ot allowed to build a mosque & synagoges or live.

[chaos4700]

Excuse me? So few Jews or Christians in Muslim nations? 10% of the Syrian population -- widely derided in our media as a "militant Muslim nation" -- are Christians! 40% of Lebanon is Christian -- and didn't stop Israel from a widespread bombing campaign that decimated the country, killed at least a thousand civilians outright and littered the southern region with unexploded cluster bombs.

You know what percentage of people in Israel are Christian? Only 2%. The reason that Jewish populations in Arab countries have declined is mostly because Israel bribes them to come to Israel and then turns it into a PR stunt:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/938673.html

Muslims are commanded by the tenants of Islam to respect both Jews and Christians. The Article 13 of the Constitution of Iran explicitly protects its Jewish citizens ( http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ir00000_.html ) -- and Iran is touted as Israel's current threat of the day.

Get informed. Find the facts.

[sudzy]

Bring Hamas to the peace table? Somehow I don't think they would show, they hate the Jews.

It's not about the land, it never has been. The land has been offered in the past, Arafat said it wasn't enough. Now they have the West Bank and Gaza, it still isn't enough.

It's not the land, it's the Jews !! It's always been the Jews ! The Jews have been forced out of every nation for thousands of years. I find it astounding that in the 21st century, everyone still thinks it's
about the land. Read the Book.

[betz55]

You need to face up to the facts, rather than hide behind some false understanding of the world.

First, for the most part Arab Jews were very much part of Arab societies, even if somewhat unequal, and were not subject to systematic persecution, unlike in Christian Europe.

Second, the of Arab Jews in Arab countries of the past is irrelevant to the question of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories today.

Third, the dispossession of the Palestinians from their homeland was wrong and cannot be justified.

Fourth, under international law Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza are illegal.

Fifth, Israel has to treat Arabs and Jews equally and fairly if it is to be considered a democratic and civilized country.

Sixth, the occupation of West Bank and Gaza and Israel's record of human rights violations are widely condemned by almost all nations of the world, not just by Palestinians, Arabs, and/or Muslims.

All you need to do is look at South Africa. The political violence ended after apartheid ended. The Israelis worrying about suicide bombers and other forms of resistance depends squarely on whether they end the occupation... it's that simple.
If Israel ends the occupation, the humiliation and indignity, and the theft of Palestinian lands then we will have the chance to witness a change in Palestinian and Arab behaviour towards Israel. No occupation equals no need for resistance...
No apartheid means justice and equality.
Don't try to complicate things: It starts and ends with the occupation.

[SiberianRat]

"Now they have the West Bank and Gaza, it still isn't enough." That's 100% untrue, and stunningly so. Gaza is closed altogether (with a humanitarian crisis unfolding) and the WB is still under occupation and settlement expansion. Unfortunately, many in Israel and the U.S. don't even realize how much this HURTS Israel.

This is a great article, Mr. Rosenberg.

[xxnounxx]

oh please get a life sudzy
IT IS ABOUT THE LAND LAND LAND LAND...MEMORISE IT DEAR,,,IT WILL BE GOOD FOR YOU

[abdallac]

Is this what you've been taught to think??

You think Arabs hate Jews? Because they are Jewish?? How ignorant. Do you know how many Arab Jews lived on that land, and all over the Mid East LONG before Israel was ever established - they are called Sephardic Jews.

There are Arab Christians and Arab Muslims, none of us EVER had a problem with our Jewish neighbors when they lived in Egypt, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Syria. Arabs have a problem with blind and rabid Z I O N I S M that is anti-Semetic at it's core. These people you displace are the self same Semites as any Jew claims to also be.

Read a book - the Palestinians had nothing to do with WWII, they had nothing to do with the Holocaust and Arab Jews have always lived there.

[courtb]

While I definitely don't think all Arabs and/or Muslims hate Jews, a good proportion do. A lot of antisemitism that comes out of the Arab world has very little to do with Israeli policies. Historically, Jews have always been second class citizens in the Arab world. Currently, movies and books with the idea of blood libel (Jews use victims' blood for matzot) are guaranteed hits in countries such as Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

In 1937, the king of Saudi Arabia said: "Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty." During WWII, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem requested German help in eliminating Jewish settlements in Palestine"offering, in exchange, a pan-Islamic jihad in alliance with Germany against Jews around the world. He was a powerful Muslim voice of antisemitism during WWII.

It's very false to claim Zionism is antisemitic as Wilhelm Marrih, in 1879, created the phrase as a more "scientific" sounding name for the rampant anti-Jewish sentiments in German society.

I could go on, but I think I've said enough. Hopefully, I've taught you something new today, or at least inspired you to "read a book" and do a bit more research.

[celticjag]

There will be no peace, until the illegal settlements, including those being built today, are given up and until Hamas is recognized and brought to the peace table! I fear that these things will not happen anytime soon. The Israeli blockade of Gaza only hurts her position in the world and makes new terrorists for the future.