Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
October 4, 2005, by Stephen Zunes [Source]
Key Points
* The U.S. role as a superpower with strong strategic and economic interests in the region often conflicts with its role as mediator in the Israeli-Syrian peace process.
* Syria has moderated its once-belligerent posture toward the Israelis and is now closer to accepting the existence of Israel and living in peace, particularly if the Palestinians are allowed a viable state alongside Israel.
* The United States has maintained its strong support for Israel’s negotiating position, even though Israel now takes a more hard-line posture than its autocratic neighbor.
Category: Peace Process
Arafat Was the Excuse, Not the Reason, for the Failure of the Peace Process
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, November 11, 2004
by Stephen Zunes source
While there are many negative things one can say about the late Yasser Arafat, he was not the primary reason for the breakdown in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. At most, he was the excuse. This is not to say that Arafat did not make quite a number of stupid and unethical choices in his lengthy career which set back hopes for peace and badly hurt the Palestinian cause. In recent years, however, the late Palestinian leader?s negotiating position regarding the outstanding issues of the peace process?such as the extent of the Israeli withdrawal, the status of Jerusalem, and the fate of the settlements?was actually more moderate, more consistent with international law, and more in line with UN Security Council resolutions, the positions of America’s leading allies, and the policies of previous U.S. administrations than the current Israeli or American positions…
Israelis and Palestinians Attempt to Jumpstart the Peace Process Despite Washington’s Support for Sharon
By Stephen Zunes, Posted December 3, 2003
[source]
The peace plan signed in Geneva December 1 by leading Israeli and Palestinian political figures represents an important step forward. Former president Jimmy Carter who was present at the ceremony may be correct in noting that ‘It’s unlikely we shall ever see a more promising foundation for peace.’ Contrary to initial reports at the time and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s inept diplomacy notwithstanding, then-Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak’s peace proposal at Camp David in July 2000 did not actually provide the Palestinians with a viable independent state. President Bill Clinton’s amended proposal that December was more reasonable, but still fell short of what even moderate Palestinians could accept…
U.S. Must Insist Israel Return to the Peace Talks and Withdraw from Lebanon
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, February 1, 2000
[Source] Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s decision to pull out of the peace talks with Syria is a shameless capitulation to Israel’s far right and raises serious questions as to whether the Israeli government is seriously interested in peace. President Clinton must demand that Israel return immediately to the negotiation table and come into full compliance with UN Security Council resolutions or risk an immediate cutoff of U.S. military and economic aid. The Israeli government broke off the talks following an attack by Lebanese guerrillas against Israeli occupation forces inside Lebanon…