1. What were the motivating factors for publishing this book?
 
Since the end of the Cold War—when the strategic environment seemed so promising for Mideast peace—failures in U.S. diplomacy have far outweighed successes. Understanding why our track record has been so poor, and applying those lessons for future negotiators, were the twin motivating factors behind this project. The existing memoirs and insider accounts are incomplete. Moreover, none of the numerous analytical works offer a dispassionate, prescriptive account.
 
For these reasons, the United States Institute of Peace placed a great deal of importance on appraising the U.S. negotiating experience and recruited five of America's top experts as part of its Study Group on Arab-Israeli Peacemaking. Under the leadership of Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer, one of our country's most experienced Mideast negotiators, the Study Group conducted over 100 consultations and interviews with leading figures from the United States and the region. This book represents the findings from this path-breaking research effort.
 
2. Why is the United States so indispensable in Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, and what is its role?
 
Dramatic asymmetries—of power, and of negotiating tactics—demand a robust third-party role. Power dynamics in this conflict are deeply unbalanced, leaving the parties unable to reach viable negotiated arrangements on their own. The eventual collapse of the Oslo process—which was initiated and defined by the parties without U.S. intervention—best exemplifies the general rule that, left on their own, the parties cannot address the deep, structural impediments to peace.
As the principal outside actor, and as Israel's most trusted ally and patron, it is the task of the United States to facilitate, mediate, and to some degree arbitrate and oversee the negotiations. Washington's challenge continues to be to cut through the asymmetries and help the parties address each other’s needs.
 
3. The next president will inherit a Middle East riven with conflict and instability. Where does the Arab-Israeli conflict fall within the larger international milieu that the next president faces?
 
The president must confront the urgency of the U.S. troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, a looming confrontation with Iran, issues of energy security, and the uncertain world of international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Rebuilding alliances and shoring up the resolve of the international community to continue the struggle against terrorism will surely be among the president’s highest priorities. In this respect, those voices calling for greater involvement in Arab-Israeli peacemaking could be drowned out in the swirl of policy debates and personnel choices that confront the next and future administrations. But this environment need not deter the next president from devoting energy and time to the Arab-Israeli peace process; indeed, it may well be the right context to press for action on that front.
 
The Arab-Israeli arena is a crucial element of the strategic environment, and successful diplomacy there can create opportunities for the United States elsewhere in the region. If the president fails early on to establish the Middle East peace process as a priority, sooner or later the conflict will flare up and further complicate U.S. objectives.
It will be up to the president to prioritize Arab-Israeli peacemaking, empower a foreign policy team that shares this view, and ensure that there is a senior focal point and a strong, experienced team within the administration to carry out its policy. Most critically, the next president needs to draw the correct lessons from our many past achievements, as well as from the failures of recent years.
 
4. Does this conflict intersect with the larger question of Islamist militancy?
 
Among the most prominent challenges for the next president will be the strength of militant Islam and the determination of some to attack the United States and the West. The Arab-Israeli conflict has not been immune to it, and in some ways has incubated and stimulated it. The emergence of Hezbollah in the early 1980s, the rise to prominence of Hamas in the 1990s and its accession to power in Palestine in 2006, and the appearance of al Qaeda affiliates among Palestinians in Lebanon demonstrate that the festering Arab-Israeli conflict can fuel forces of ever-greater radicalism. This factor alone will present future administrations with policy challenges unmatched by any predecessor.
 
Among the broader publics throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds, this conflict remains one of the most evocative issues troubling relations with the United States and the West.
 
5. What course of action should the next administration take?
 
The book's concluding chapter has a number of recommendations:
  1. The president needs to adopt a hands-on policy from the beginning of his/her term. The Arab-Israeli question ought to figure prominently in an early presidential speech, sending a loud and clear signal that the issue is high on the agenda.
  2. From the first day in office, the president ought to charge those responsible for Middle East policy with developing a portfolio with developing a comprehensive and durable strategy not just to manage the conflict, but to end it. Such a strategy must include concrete proposals for monitoring and judging compliance by all sides.
  3. The United States should lock in the gains of earlier negotiations, especially before public support in the region erodes or events on the ground further undermine prospects for a peaceful settlement.
  4. The next administration should make certain that any scheduled conferences or summits are well-prepared for and part of a larger strategy—it should avoid the temptation to substitute photo opportunities for real diplomacy.
  5. Washington should invest in nontraditional diplomacy. Nontraditional diplomacy is a low-cost, low-risk complement to the formal negotiating process, and given the distance between the parties and the turmoil of recent years, these activities—including private political and diplomatic contacts, military and security dialogues, youth and interreligious programming, and health, business, scientific, and cultural activities—have taken on even greater importance.
6. How does the close relationship between the U.S. and Israel affect our ability to broker Arab-Israeli peace?
 
The study group heard a variety of perspectives on issues ranging from the role of Israel in trying to shape U.S. policy to the deference that some policymakers pay to Israeli domestic political concerns. Israel plays an outsized role in U.S. politics and diplomacy; it is a fact of life that transcends party politics and carries over from one administration to the next. The study group’s Arab interlocutors emphasized that part of what makes the U.S. role so vital is its "special relationship" with Israel.
To the degree that Israel can rely on the constancy of U.S. support for its security and ultimate survival, it will be more willing to take risks for peace. What the next president needs to consider is not the nature of the U.S. strategic relationship with Israel—this should be self-evident to anyone familiar with the history of the Middle East and politics and policy in Washington—but rather how to use the U.S.-Israeli relationship beneficially in the cause of peace.
 

 

The United States sees itself to this day as an honest broker in the Middle East, and U.S. diplomats honestly try to be fair in mediating between Arabs and Israelis. The next president will need to ensure that the manner in which the United States conducts our diplomacy results in the peoples of the region sharing this perception. 

Latest Publications

Four Thoughts on Advancing Religious Engagement in Diplomacy and Development

Four Thoughts on Advancing Religious Engagement in Diplomacy and Development

Tuesday, December 1, 2020

By: Peter Mandaville, Ph.D.

After nearly 20 years and across three successive U.S. administrations, it is clear that a bipartisan consensus exists among senior foreign affairs leadership that engaging religious actors to advance key American diplomatic, national security, and development objectives needs to be a priority. With some 84 percent of the world’s population expressing a faith affiliation, the role of religion as a social force around the world—and one that figures centrally in many peacebuilding contexts—cannot be ignored in our foreign relations.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Religion

Knox Thames on the State of Global Religious Freedom

Knox Thames on the State of Global Religious Freedom

Monday, November 30, 2020

By: Knox Thames

As global restrictions on faith reach all-time highs, USIP’s Knox Thames say the United States must continue to be a vocal leader in combatting persecution and pursuing religious freedom, saying, “I think the time is right … anything we say goes out like a megaphone to the rest of the world.”

Type: Podcast

Religion

Ethiopia’s Problems Will Not End with a Military Victory

Ethiopia’s Problems Will Not End with a Military Victory

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

By: Aly Verjee

As violence continues over control of the northern Ethiopian region of Tigray, Ethiopia’s future remains unsettled, even if the conflict ends soon. Achieving the federal government’s security objectives in Tigray is unlikely to resolve both new and entrenched political challenges, and already delayed national elections, now expected in 2021, may prove a severe test of Ethiopia’s political order, and consequently affect broader regional stability. Reconciling the electoral process with efforts for reconciliation and national dialogue is now even more imperative.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Human Rights Education as the Solution to Religious Persecution

Human Rights Education as the Solution to Religious Persecution

Monday, November 23, 2020

By: Knox Thames

Persecution on account of religion or belief confronts every community somewhere around the world—and it is an increasing trend. Challenges range from terrorist violence against minorities, such as ISIS’ depravations against Yazidis, to persecution by authoritarian governments, with China’s targeting of all faiths a prime example. To organize a defense of freedom of conscience and belief, the United States convened the Ministerial to Advance Freedom of Religion or Belief in 2018 and 2019, bringing together a virtual congress of nations and civil society activists from around the world. The third ministerial, organized by Poland, was held virtually in mid-November. Discussions identified challenges but also solutions. One consistent answer to the vexing problem of persecution was proffered: educating youth about human rights and pluralism.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Religion; Education & Training

Afghanistan Withdrawal Should Be Based on Conditions, Not Timelines

Afghanistan Withdrawal Should Be Based on Conditions, Not Timelines

Thursday, November 19, 2020

By: Scott Worden

The Taliban’s tactic of running out the clock on the U.S. troop presence may bear fruit after the announcement on Tuesday that U.S. forces will reduce to 2,500 by January 15. The Trump administration successfully created leverage by engaging directly with the Taliban to meet their paramount goal of a U.S. withdrawal in exchange for genuine peace talks and counterterrorism guarantees. This strategy brought about unprecedented negotiations between Afghan government representatives and the Taliban in Doha. A walk down a conditions-based path to peace, long and winding as it may be, had begun.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Peace Processes

View All Publications