The Involvement of the United States in the Mideast Conflict - Essay Example

One of the biggest times in recent history that the U.S. has tried to mediate this conflict was in 2000. President Clinton announced his invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Arafat on July 5, 2000, to come to Camp David to continue their negotiations on the Middle East peace process. This was supposed to build on the positive steps towards peace of the earlier 1978 Camp David Accords where President Jimmy Carter was able to broker a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. The Oslo Accords of 1993 between the later assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat had provided that agreement should be reached on all outstanding issues between the Palestinians and Israeli sides within five years of the implementation of Palestinian autonomy. However, the interim process put in place under Oslo had fulfilled neither Israeli nor Palestinian expectations, and Arafat argued that the summit was premature. But the Americans decided to strongly involve themselves in this process.

On July 11, the Camp David 2000 Summit convened, but it ended without an agreement. Everyone said they would continue negotiating, but the impetus was lost. The second intifada changed things and made the Americans less wary of engaging. President Busy was a lot less interested in the Arab-Israeli conflict than President Clinton. This is more evidence of the sometimes fickle nature of the American government's actions in the region. What this conflict need is sustained attention; it has not received this.

Clinton, who promised Arafat that no one would be blamed if the talks failed, did, in fact, blame Arafat after the failure of the talks, stating, "I regret that in 2000 Arafat missed the opportunity to bring that nation into being and pray for the day when the dreams of the Palestinian people for a state and a better life will be realized in a just and lasting peace." The failure to come to an agreement was widely attributed to Yasser Arafat, as he walked away from the table without making a concrete counter-offer and because Arafat did little to quell the series of Palestinian riots that began shortly after the summit.  In 2004, two books by American participants at the summit were published that placed the blame for the failure of the summit on Arafat. The books were The Missing Peace by longtime US Middle East envoy Dennis Ross and My Life by President Clinton. Clinton wrote that Arafat once complimented Clinton by telling him, "You are a great man." Clinton responded, "I am not a great man. I am a failure, and you made me one." The Americans have always been quick to blame Palestinians for the problems in the Mideast and the fallout of the Camp David summit was no exception. 

          As one critic writes of the issue:

Under US supervision, the Palestinian-Israeli “peace process” has become a goal in and of itself. A false sense of normalcy has been created because of the ongoing process of negotiations. The lack of visible resistance to Israeli occupation from the Palestinian side, except for temporary flare-ups, and Israel’s ability to continue negotiations while continuing to build settlements in occupied Palestinian Territory has created the false impression that the “process” of achieving peace could substitute for peace itself. Thus, the difficult substantial issues at the core of the conflict, including the acceptance that Israel’s occupation of Arab territory it conquered in the 1967 Israeli-Arab War is illegal, have been constantly deflected in order to maintain talks without requiring Israel to face up to its obligations.

What can be done to fix this problem? First, the United States should consult its Arab partners with respect to the Palestinian cause. Also, securing a just peace should become a U.S. priority instead of regional economic cooperation. Such cooperation will be a natural result if peace and security are achieved first, but this should not in and of itself be the priority. As it is now, there is simply a bargain between unequal adversaries, whereas a real solution would be Palestinian self-determination. This would not only silence the extremists but would produce economic growth and development that has been stifled in the entire region for decades. It can be accomplished in our lifetime if there is the will.