Finding a leader who can successfully maneuver through an ocean of complex issues is critical to peacefully resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Princeton experts said Monday (2/6/12) during a public forum
Former U.S. Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer and former Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., shared perspectives on the topic "Is Middle East Peace Possible?'' Deborah Amos, Middle East correspondent for National Public Radio (NPR), moderated their discussions.
All three have extensive experience with the Middle East. Kurtzer’s appointments included terms in Israel and Egypt. Wexler, who served in congress for 12 years, is now president of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace in Washington, D.C. Kurtzer and Amos are also visiting professors at Princeton.
The Woodrow Wilson Schoolof Public and International Affairs sponsored the event.
The issue of leadership came up as speakers shared perspectives on borders and security as seen through the eyes of Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
Each country is claiming the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, the West Bank and East Jerusalem to varying degrees, Wexler explained. In regard to security, Israel will not make concessions until it feels there are enough security measures in place to protect it from potential threats, he added. Meanwhile, Palestinians are willing to provide such security measures, but not unless certain border concessions are made first, making it difficult for either side to move forward.
In addition, border issues are tangled with issues regarding infrastructure, access, political structure, utilities, housing, and human services, Wexler added.
The U.S. provides leadership in the form of financial and political support, but there are concerns about the effectiveness of continuing such support, Kurtzer said.
''This administration has high marks for coming into office (in 2009) thinking that something could be done,'' Kurtzer said. ''It looked like the U.S. would take an ambitious role. Then it seemed to go from (a) strategic to tactical (approach).''
The model switched to a business, results-oriented model, Kurtzer noted, suggesting reluctance to continue playing a role. Politicians are asking "why do something when there is no pay-off for us?'' Kurtzer said.
The attitude, he added, comes at a time when the U.S. is preoccupied with its own difficulties, said the ambassador.
"We have an overloaded domestic agenda with social, economic, and infrastructure challenges,'' Kurtzer said. ''Then add on the Middle East and the demand for policy maker's time. Also, it is an election year. There is an out-of-balance need for balance and the needs of the constituency that says (stick to) only black and white issues. There is also debate about whether we have the capability to do what we used to be able to do.
''The (Washington) D.C. consensus re the peace process is 'it's too hard' and 'I can wait','' Kurtzer added.
But delaying support for an Israeli-Palestinian resolution of conflict will be more expensive in the future with the potential for greater damage politically, he said.
''On a street level, the Arab-Israeli conflict resonates with Arab public opinion to such a degree that many governments have had to damp down visibility,'' Kurtzer explained. ''Now they can no longer keep the lid on.''
He cited 12 attacks since last September on the Egyptian pipeline that carries natural gas to Israel.
''Popular anger is more free to express itself than previously,'' Kurtzer said.
International support is also overwhelmed with leadership issues. Last week China and Russia blocked a United Nations Security Council resolution, supported by the Arab League and 13 of the 15-member security council, that condemned the Syrian government for its violent crackdown on civilians protesting oppressive rule by President Bashar al-Assad. Russia's only warm water port is in Syria, and Russia benefits economically from arms trading within Syrian borders, exacerbating Israeli security concerns.
Because it is so difficult to separate Israeli-Arab conflict from general unrest in the Middle East, and with the Arab Spring wave of demonstrations for democracy and freedom from oppression, finding a leader who can work with a number of different factions at a number of different levels is imperative, according to Kurtzer and Wexler.
''We need a Sadat,'' Wexler said, '''someone who will go beyond to act in a counter-intuitive way. ‘’Such a leader does not exist or is not in power to act.''
Former Egyptian President Anwar el Sadat was best known for the 1978 Nobel Peace Prize he shared with Israel's Prime Minister Menachim Begin for successfully negotiating a peace treaty that year that remains in effect today. The countries had been bitter enemies during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.
As a leader, Sadat demonstrated political savvy, and skillfully worked with the media, international political groups, The Vatican, and U.S. evangelist Billy Graham during periods of tremendous unrest in his country. Sadat also showed tremendous versatility. He was trained as a soldier and admired the military strategies used by Hitler during World War II, yet he was also inspired by Mahatma Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence. Sadat's military career ended when he joined the administration of his predecessor, President Gamar Abdel Nasser, as a public relations officer, and he rose through the ranks to become Egypt's third president, succeeding Nasser when he died.
Sadat's acceptance speech on receiving the Nobel Prize typified his grace and demonstrated commitment to the cause of peace.
''Let us put an end to wars, let us reshape life on the solid basis of equity and truth,'' Sadat said. ''And it is this call, which reflected the will of the Egyptian people, of the great majority of the Arab and Israeli peoples, and indeed of millions of men, women, and children around the world that you are today honoring. And these hundreds of millions will judge to what extent every responsible leader in the Middle East has responded to the hopes of mankind.''
The forum’s lively discussion, which filled Dodds Auditorium and sent overflow crowds to a simulcast nearby, boiled down to finding answers for a long list of questions on priorities, preferences, sustainability, economics, politics, and social structures. Kurtzer and Wexler could only share their perspectives. They left it up to the audience to decide if peace was possible based on what they learned.
A second follow-up lecture forum is planned for Tuesday, March 6 (2012) at 4:30 p.m. at Dodds Auditorium in Robertson Hall which will focus on the same question but in the areas of Jerusalem and refugees. The event is free and open to the public but seating is limited. Both events will be archived for later viewing on Princeton’s website.
Comments