Scowcroft and Brzezinski: We believe that the Arab-Israeli peace process is one issue that requires priority attention.
HHW
By Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski
Friday, November 21, 2008; A23
The election of Barack Obama to be the 44th president is profoundly
historic. We have at long last been able to come together in a way
that has eluded us in the long history of our great country. We should
celebrate this triumph of the true spirit of America.
Election Day celebrations were replicated in time zones around the
world, something we have not seen in a long time. While euphoria is
ephemeral, we must endeavor to use its energy to bring us all together
as Americans to cope with the urgent problems that beset us.
When Obama takes office in two months, he will find a number of
difficult foreign policy issues competing for his attention, each with
strong advocates among his advisers. We believe that the Arab-Israeli
peace process is one issue that requires priority attention.
In perhaps no other region was the election of Obama more favorably
received than the Middle East. Immediate attention to the Israeli-
Palestinian dispute would help cement the goodwill that Obama's
election engendered. Not everyone in the Middle East views the
Palestinian issue as the greatest regional challenge, but the deep
sense of injustice it stimulates is genuine and pervasive.
Unfortunately, the current administration's intense efforts over the
past year will not resolve the issue by Jan. 20. But to let attention
lapse would reinforce the feelings of injustice and neglect in the
region. That could spur another eruption of violence between the
warring parties or in places such as Lebanon or Gaza, reversing what
progress has been made and sending the parties back to square one.
Lurking in the background is the possibility that the quest for a two-
state solution may be abandoned by the Palestinians, the Israelis, or
both -- with unfortunate consequences for all.
Resolution of the Palestinian issue would have a positive impact on
the region. It would liberate Arab governments to support U.S.
leadership in dealing with regional problems, as they did before the
Iraq invasion. It would dissipate much of the appeal of Hezbollah and
Hamas, dependent as it is on the Palestinians' plight. It would change
the region's psychological climate, putting Iran back on the defensive
and putting a stop to its swagger.
The major elements of an agreement are well known. A key element in
any new initiative would be for the U.S. president to declare publicly
what, in the view of this country, the basic parameters of a fair and
enduring peace ought to be. These should contain four principal
elements: 1967 borders, with minor, reciprocal and agreed-upon
modifications; compensation in lieu of the right of return for
Palestinian refugees; Jerusalem as real home to two capitals; and a
nonmilitarized Palestinian state.
Something more might be needed to deal with Israeli security concerns
about turning over territory to a Palestinian government incapable of
securing Israel against terrorist activity. That could be dealt with
by deploying an international peacekeeping force, such as one from
NATO, which could not only replace Israeli security but train
Palestinian troops to become effective.
To date, the weakness of the negotiating parties has limited their
ability to come to an agreement by themselves. The elections in Israel
scheduled for February are certainly a complicating factor, as is the
deep split among Palestinians between Fatah and Hamas. But if the
peace process begins to gain momentum, it is difficult to imagine that
Hamas will want to be left out, and that same momentum would provide
the Israeli people a unique chance to register their views on the
future of their country.
This weakness can be overcome by the president speaking out clearly
and forcefully about the fundamental principles of the peace process;
he also must press the case with steady determination. That initiative
should then be followed -- not preceded -- by the appointment of a
high-level dignitary to pursue the process on the president's behalf,
a process based on the enunciated presidential guidelines. Such a
presidential initiative should instantly galvanize support, both
domestic and international, and provide great encouragement to the
Israeli and Palestinian peoples.
To say that achieving a successful resolution of this critical issue
is a simple task would be to scoff at history. But in many ways the
current situation is such that the opportunity for success has never
been greater, or the costs of failure more severe.
Brent Scowcroft was national security adviser to Presidents Gerald
Ford and George H.W. Bush. He is president of the Forum for
International Policy and the Scowcroft Group. Zbigniew Brzezinski was
national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. He is trustee and
counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The
two are authors of "America and The World: Conversations on the Future
of American Foreign Policy."