Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumBackground: Arafat didn't negotiate - he just kept saying no
The call from Bill Clinton came hours after the publication in the New York Times of a "revisionist" article on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. On holiday, Ehud Barak, Israel's former prime minister, was swimming in a cove in Sardinia. According to Barak, Clinton said: "What the hell is this? Why is she turning the mistakes we [ie, the US and Israel] made into the essence? The true story of Camp David was that for the first time in the history of the conflict the American president put on the table a proposal, based on UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, very close to the Palestinian demands, and Arafat refused even to accept it as a basis for negotiations, walked out of the room, and deliberately turned to terrorism."
Clinton was speaking of the two-week-long Camp David conference in July 2000 which he had organised and mediated and its failure, and the eruption at the end of September of the Palestinian intifada which has continued since. Halfway through the conference, apparently on July 18, Clinton had "slowly" - to avoid misunderstanding - read out to Arafat a document, endorsed in advance by Barak, outlining the main points of a future settlement. The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.
Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
Today Barak portrays Arafat's behaviour at Camp David as a "performance" geared to exacting from the Israelis as many concessions as possible without ever seriously intending to reach a peace settlement or sign an "end to the conflict".
"He did not negotiate in good faith; indeed, he did not negotiate at all. He just kept saying no to every offer, never making any counterproposals of his own," he says. Barak shifts between charging Arafat with "lacking the character or will" to make a historic compromise (as did the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1977-79, when he made peace with Israel) to accusing him of secretly planning Israel's demise while he strings along a succession of Israeli and Western leaders and, on the way, hoodwinks "naive journalists".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
cachukis
(2,615 posts)Ray Bruns
(4,564 posts)afraid that if he made peace with the Israelis, hed end up like Sadat, or if he was afraid if there was peace, no one would need him or the PLO any more, or maybe he just wasnt the right person. But it was Ararats inability to compromise that the war continues.
cachukis
(2,615 posts)and I would caution my students not to just accept what was on the page, there is always a bit of truth in what everyone says, but to consider what was not on the page.
Authors generally want to frame their story to fit their perspective.
Perhaps I'm missing something.
Lithos
(26,451 posts)I think that has been established. Why he took that position is a bit cloudy.
But what I subsequently learned - about 18 months ago, I had a dinner with a former Palestinian negotiator who'd been part of the delegation. He said the whole Palestinian delegation had decided among themselves they should accept it. They went back to Arafat, and Arafat said no. I subsequently heard from another Palestinian on that delegation who said Arafat thought he could still do a better deal under Bush because he thought maybe Bush will be even more forthcoming.
From this transcript which I think adds more nuance: https://www.npr.org/2023/10/19/1207243717/23-years-ago-israelis-and-palestinians-were-talking-about-a-two-state-solution
cachukis
(2,615 posts)Arafat refused to take any deal, because if he did , he would not be able to as easily loot all the money meant for the Palestinian people.
Nanjeanne
(5,435 posts)In the 1990s a breakthrough agreement negotiated between Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Oslo, Norway, set out a process for a mutually negotiated two-state solution to be gradually implemented by the end of the decade. Although the process showed initial promise and progress, a combination of dissatisfaction and distrust led to the breakdown and delay of the process. After frustration and provocation led to the outbreak of violence in 2000, the process proved difficult to restart before coming to a virtual halt after 2008.
Implementation of a two-state
In 1993 Israel, led by Rabins foreign minister Shimon Peres, held a series of negotiations with the PLO in Oslo, Norway. In early September Yasser Arafat sent a letter to Rabin saying that the PLO recognized Israels right to exist, accepted UN Resolutions 242 and 338 (which called for lasting peace with Israel in exchange for Israels withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders), and renounced terrorism and violence. Days later they signed a Declaration of Principles (known as the Oslo Accords), agreeing to set up Palestinian self-government over five years time in exchange for Palestinian partnership in matters of Israeli security. The most contentious issues (including Jerusalem, final borders and Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and the return of Palestinian refugees) were set to be discussed after that five-year period.
Negotiations continued as Israel and the PLO worked to implement a two-state solution on the ground. In May 1994 a deal concluded in Cairo led to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the cities of Gaza and Jericho that same month and set up the Palestinian Authority (PA) to carry out civilian functions in those areas. The PAs autonomous governance was extended to six other cities in 1995, after the conclusion of the Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (known as Oslo II). A seventh city, Hebron, was to be handed over in 1996. This agreement also split the West Bank and the Gaza Strip into three types of territory: areas under Palestinian administration and security (Area A), areas under Palestinian administration but joint Israeli-Palestinian security (Area B), and areas under Israeli administration and security (Area C).
Dissent and disruption
From the start, some Israelis and Palestinians sought to disrupt a two-state solution. Religious nationalists on both sides believed their respective governments did not have the right to cede any part of the land. In 1994, during the overlap of the Jewish festival of Purim and the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, Jewish extremist Baruch Goldstein opened fire on Muslim worshippers in the Sanctuary of Abraham above the Cave of Machpelah (also called the Tomb of the Patriarchs) in Hebron, a holy site frequented by both Jews and Muslims. The same year, Hamas, a militant Palestinian organization that likewise rejected a two-state solution, began a campaign of suicide bombings. On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish extremist while attending a peace rally.
As the election campaign to replace Rabin was underway, violence from the dissenters persisted. After a series of suicide bombings orchestrated by Hamas in early 1996, Benjamin Netanyahu (Likud Party), campaigning on a slogan of peace with security, won the election against key Oslo negotiator Peres. Upon becoming prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu initially refused to meet with Arafat or to implement Israels withdrawal from Hebron as agreed upon by his predecessor. Netanyahu and Arafat later agreed to a partial withdrawal from the city with the 1997 Hebron Agreement. In October 1998, five years after the Oslo Accords were signed and final status negotiations were supposed to take place, Netanyahu and Arafat concluded the Wye River Memorandum. Under this agreement, Israel was to continue a partial withdrawal from the West Bank while the PA was to implement a crackdown on Palestinian violence. The agreement was suspended the following month, however, after opposition in Netanyahus coalition threatened a vote of no confidence in the Knesset, Israels legislative body. Despite the suspension of the agreement, the Knesset voted no confidence anyway, and early elections were held.
In the 1999 elections the Labour Party was returned to power, and the new prime minister, Ehud Barak, pursued final status negotiations. Though negotiations progressed, a high-profile summit at Camp David fell through, and Baraks premiership was short-lived. Negotiations were likewise disrupted with Likud leader Ariel Sharons contentious visit in 2000 to the Temple Mount. The Temple Mount, which is also the site of Al-Aqṣā Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, is sacred to both Jews and Muslims and is located in a central area of Jerusalem claimed by both Israelis and Palestinians as part of their capital. The visit was seen as a deliberate provocation and sparked riots. Barak resigned in late 2000 before any final status agreements could be reached.
Sharon was elected in 2001 in the midst of the second intifada, which had been sparked by his visit in 2000 to the Temple Mount. Negotiations stalled as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict reached one of its most violent periods. Israeli troops reentered cities in the West Bank and confined Arafat to his compound in Ramallah until he fell gravely ill in 2004. Sharon, meanwhile, tried a new approach to the peace process in 2005 by unilaterally dismantling Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip (along with four Jewish settlements in the West Bank) and withdrawing Israeli troops from the territory. Facing fierce opposition, especially within his own party, he formed a new party, Kadima, which was committed to the pursual of a two-state solution.
Sharon suffered a massive stroke in early 2006, only months before elections. Ehud Olmert became acting prime minister and took the reins of Kadima, which became the dominant party in the Knesset after the elections. The PA also held legislative elections early that year, in which Hamas won a surprise majority. Although some leaders of Hamas now indicated a willingness to accept a two-state solution, as well as the bilateral agreements between Israel and the PA, Israel was unwilling to negotiate with a Hamas-led government.
After armed infighting among factions in 2007, PA Pres. Mahmoud Abbas dissolved the government, leaving Hamas out of the PA. Peace talks between Israel and the PA commenced later that year with an international conference in Annapolis, Maryland, U.S. The negotiations continued into 2008 but failed to lead to a new deal after Olmert was forced to step down amid corruption charges. His foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, was unable to win the post of prime minister to replace him. The contents of the talks, which discussed final status issues, were leaked and published by Al Jazeera in 2011. Both sides seemed to accept on principle the division of Jerusalem and a symbolic number of Palestinians refugees to be repatriated into Israel. In one of the meetings, moreover, Olmert offered the Palestinian negotiators more than 93 percent of the territory they claimed in the West Bank.
Netanyahu was returned to the post of prime minister in 2009. President Abbas insisted that Netanyahu pick up negotiations where Olmert had left them and refused to meet without a freeze on building Jewish settlements on territory claimed by the Palestinians. Under pressure from the United States, Netanyahu implemented a freeze on settlements in the West Bank from November 2009 to September 2010. Because a freeze was not implemented for Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, which Netanyahu insisted were not settlements, Abbas refused to meet until the last few weeks of the freeze. When the freeze ended, negotiations ceased. Direct talks did not occur again until Livni was appointed to resume the task in 201314. The talks fell apart after relations continued to falter and negotiators failed to make significant progress within the set timetable.
After years of negotiations at a standstill, the administration of U.S. Pres. Donald Trump announced its intent to revive the peace process in 2017. Though both Israeli and Palestinian leaders initially reacted to the initiative with optimism, the Palestinians were disheartened when the United States recognized Jerusalem as Israels capital in December 2017 and moved its ambassadorial mission to that city the following May. As tensions brewed between the United States and the PA, the United States began to cut funding to the PA, as well as to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East) and other aid programs, arguing that the support was not in accordance with the U.S. national interest. The country also ordered the closure of the PLO office in Washington, D.C., citing its recent lack of negotiations with Israel.
By the time the Trump administration unveiled its peace plan, which it touted as the Deal of the Century, the Palestinians had determined that the United States could no longer play a fair role as mediator in the conflict. The first part of the plan, which proposed significant development in the economy and infrastructure of the Palestinian territories, was announced in June 2019. The second part of the plan, the political component, was released in January 2020 and envisioned predetermined solutions to final status issues: Israel would keep nearly all of its West Bank settlements, impose sovereignty over the Jordan Valley located along the West Banks eastern border, and retain an undivided Jerusalem as its capital, while Palestinians would receive demilitarized self-governance within a reduced West Bank territory and the Gaza Strip. The plan, which was received favourably by Israeli leaders but condemned by Palestinian leaders, did little to revitalize negotiations before the end of Trumps presidency. In 2021 the administration of U.S. Pres. Joe Biden began restoring aid to the Palestinians and promised to reopen the PLO office in Washington, D.C.
There is much more history to read about in the article for those interested.
Igel
(36,038 posts)One smart cookie. (To use a phrase I don't think I've ever used before in my 60+ years of language.)
I remember one speech he gave to condemn a mass suicide-to-homicide attack that killed Israelis, mostly not > 30 years of age.
At the end, he yelled something. Curious, I rummaged.
After saying how horrible it was that this attack happened, he yelled out the Arabic equivalent of "A million martyrs to Jerusalem! A million martyrs to Jerusalem!"
For the West, he said X. But for Arabic-speakers, at the end, he said, "That's a ruse--a million more suicide bombers!" Now, if his speech was televised on Arab tv stations, they'd have heard a voice-over that might be accurate, but they'd hear *him* in his own voice authentically saying something different. (Heh-heh.) If you're a non-Arabic-speaker, all you heard was pleasant vocables followed by something not very intelligible. Made me think of a bull with a ring through its nose being led along.
I learned the Arabic phrase--long since forgotten (seriously--at one point I could introduce myself, say where I grew up, my parents' and my occupation, my hobbies and likes, age, marital status, where I lived and for how long ... In Arabic ... Had a Palestinian "G" professor, who was pro-Palestinian but said he could never go back home because of intolerance and said he'd be better off in Israel than in his home town because in his home town he'd be in the closet or dead. But now I struggle to say "My name is" but seriously, that's 2 syllables ... it's been 17 years; my Hungarian was much better, but it's been maybe 25 years for that and my Hungarian's entirely gone for a long swim in the river Lethe).
In the few years after that Arafat speech I listened ... It wasn't the last time he rhetorically cried crocodile tears, saying how horrible a massacre was in English before calling in Arabic for a far greater massacre. Then he was buried and no longer speechified.
But alive, he covered his butt. And expressed his bona fides. One smart cookie.