Peace Process: American Diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli Conflict since 1967 By William B. Quandt - Book Report/Review Example

Review: Peace process: American diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967 By William B. Quandt William Quandt is an who has the knowledge and expertise to critically evaluate the policies and political environment of countries. He has written many such books to draw the attention of people towards the peculiarities of politics. Decade of Decisions and Peace Process are two of his major works. The reader may take Peace Process as an extension to the ideas and circumstances of Decade of Decisions at the first read. This paper aims to summarize the ideas and views of Quandt as they appeared in Peace Process and to evaluate the text and assess its contribution to the understanding of “Middle East Politics”. The deep knowledge that Quandt possessed was not merely acquired by book reading but the personal involvement and participation in both Nixon and National Security Council. His involvement led him to become more knowledgeable than ever in the foreign policymaking processes. The writing style, depth of information and consideration given to the issues relate to the fact that the author is well aware of the complexities of policymaking and political issues. In this book the author discusses Johnson’s, Nixon’s and Reagan’s policies critically and is of the opinion that their policies were more inclined to relate the more complex issues of the Middle East to the regional symptom of the Cold War. Quandt appreciates the activist paradigm proposed by the Carter administration and also favours Bush’s regional foreign policy. He provides references from the historical lessons and provides information and warning to the people. For instance, he points towards the success of the Camp David agreements. ‘Change’ plays an important role in the American Government. The result of these changes is the emergence of most of the problems that shakers and movers of American foreign policy encounter. It is important to notice that this is not the point that needs consideration in diplomatic history, Quandt wants the reader to realize that on the average the top officials of the Middle East policy change after around every 3 to 4 years. Since American Government undergoes major changes after every few years, it becomes vital and complex for them when they face the competent and persistent personalities like King Hussein of Jordan. Such participants are at an advantageous position as they are aware of the American Diplomacy. This is the main point that Quandt has prompted in Peace Process. The book provides plenty of information about the American officials who are supposedly involved in the Middle East peacemaking missions within the last 3 decades. The book provides a collective memory of events and views of the American officials towards resolving the Middle East peace issues. Quandt does not provide a mere overview but provides a detailed account of all presidential approaches towards the Middle East diplomacy. He provides a fair and clear picture of all presidential from Johnson to Bush and critically evaluates their policies and the credibility of those policies. His views are clearly written and managed throughout the books. The information provided flows from one point to the other in an organized manner. However, the extreme vindication and details at times exasperate the reader and divert his attention from the scenario to other factors. The book on the other hand, succeeded in achieving its aim to warn the readers about the outcomes, that repeating the mistakes of past may create. Quandt gives an account of the diplomatic steps taken by the United Sates in order to build and maintain peace between Israel and the Arabs. This reading provides an account of the Six Day war and the demand of Arabs to get back the land taken by Israel and demanded of justice for the Palestinians. Arabs were not ready to accept the legitimacy of Israel and Israel was not willing to move an inch from the decision of keeping the land and wanted Arabs to recognize Israel’s right to exist and flourish. The tension persisted and the war broke out again in 1973. Until the second war Kissinger did not pay any heed to the Middle East. The writer points towards this ignorant behaviour and relates it to the adverse outcome in the shape of another war. The book also accounts for the contributions of Carter who began his efforts to resolve the dispute in 70s. Carter started negotiations and the lands were given under the possession of Israel permanently. In order to maintain peace, Carter was the first person who involved the matter of Palestinians while negotiating. Quandt also mentions Reagan’s efforts but criticizes his efforts for lack of action. He also mentions the peace negotiations of George W. Bush, and Clinton’s efforts in peacemaking attempts in the Middle East. This book is of immense importance for the study of Middle East Politics. The students or other readers may benefit from the warnings and historical accounts which resulted in chaos and disputes as discussed by the writer. The Middle East Politics is not based on rational principles but rather is founded on rigid and irrational decisions. Middle East politicians are most of the time diplomatic in order to gain prestige, self-respect and personal goals. Their demands increase as the power in their hands rise. Their attitude gets flexible as they get weaker in power or resources. For instance, Quandt reveals the instances when Arabs increased their demands and became more extreme as they felt that they have the power to influence others and pressurize them. The time and history, as discussed in the peace process provide a detailed account of Arab’s and Israel’s mentality as they do not move an inch from their perspective until a larger and greater force compels them or they see the defeat as a sure thing to happen. Middle East politics is more based on individual’s and individual party’s decisions rather than on collaborative approaches. The personal values of the person in charge and his decisions are upheld and given priority. The Middle East politicians do not accept the defeat or demands of others until they are defeated via military acts by them. They realize the importance of political agreements after they fail military wars. Again Arab’s example can be taken in this regard as they realized the importance of political compromise and agreements as Israel gained more and more power in the world of politics. The complexity of the Middle East politics can also be identified by the fact that all the efforts and strategic acts of American politicians up till now went in vain. The negotiations were all useless as Middle East Politics do not take compromise as a wise step to take in political grounds. However, Quandt also discussed some of the leading actors of the Politics who are well known for their strategic plays in their eras. The memorable characters of Middle Eastern Politics that emerged in the book under consideration include Hafiz al-Assad, who was one of the successful presidents of Syria. He was an enigmatic character of the Middle East Politics that Israelis considered as a leader who is worth to deal with. Anwar Sadat was another bright figure in the Middle Eastern Political ground who was not only admired by the United States negotiating teams for pushing Egypt away from the Soviet sphere but also for his distinctive quality of taking ‘risks’ which most of the Arab politicians feared to cope with. Menachem Begin is, however, the most influential of all in the Political arena. He was the Prime Minister of Israel from 1977 to 1982. His expertise of dealing with issues, knowledge about the diplomacy that prevails in Political grounds and stubbornness in achieving the goals was admirable. His tactical brilliance is admirable which unlike other politicians had flexibility of opinions and contentious nature. His self respect was accompanied with the patriotism and reverence to others values. His patriotism often brought him at unusual circumstances with friends like Reagan and United States Senators. In conclusion, we can say that Quandt analysis and assessment of the peace policies provide important information about historical political relationships between Israel, Palestinians, and the Arabs. The accounts of the major political figures and their strategies to resolve issues prevailing in their states are discussed critically. The nature of the political leaders and their viewpoints that greatly affect the internal and external political conditions are also mentioned. The criticism on US politicians is mainly based on their inability to act upon their plans. His argument is based on the fact that mere words are not enough to prove the credibility of a Politician’s policies. The major part of the success of a president or a country’s efforts is dependent on the outcome of those efforts. The rigidity of principles and stubbornness of attitude is not always fruitful for the welfare of one’s country. This fact is also determined by Quandt by mentioning the Middle East political leaders who sometimes fell due to such attitude. Cutting it short and simple, this book provides a detailed and one of the most informative accounts of historical political conditions that prevailed in the Middle East and the role of US and other authorities in resolving the disputes that existed. Bibliography: QUANDT, W. B. (2001). Peace process : American diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967. Washington, D.C., Brookings Institution Press. Read More