USIP experts provide analysis on the departure of Middle East Envoy George Mitchell.

May 13, 2011

Middle East Peace Envoy George Mitchell’s resignation May 13 could be a blow to the Middle East peace process – or a spur to action – just days before President Obama is expected to give a major foreign policy speech on the region.

Mitchell is leaving the job after two “mostly futile years” pressing the Israelis and Palestinians to resolve their differences, according to a report in The New York Times May 13.

The United States Institute of Peace’s Robin Wright says the departure is a setback to American diplomatic objectives in the region because Mitchell had a proven track record in mediating peace, deep institutional knowledge in foreign policy, and “enormous credibility” in the international community.

“In other words,” she says, “he had the heft necessary to take on one of the world’s oldest and thorniest conflicts.”

The timing of the departure is awkward, she says, because the U.S. faces a “confluence of pivotal events in the region,” including the Arab uprisings and the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. That creates what could be a moment for action on peace.

Earlier in the day, Wright and others spoke at USIP in Washington at an event on the Arab Spring. Wright said U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is “grossly inconsistent,” and seems to have a different approach for each country, from Libya to Yemen to Bahrain. Other panelists at the event indicated the administration can’t have a one-size-fits-all approach to countries facing such an array of challenges.

The White House announced Mitchell’s departure late May 13. He worked as a “tireless advocate” for peace, whose contributions “contributed immeasurably” to the goal of peace in the Arab-Israeli conflict,” President Obama said in a statement.

“As a nation, we remain committed to peace in the Middle East and to building on George’s hard work and progress toward achieving this goal,” President Obama said.

David Hale, the deputy Middle East envoy, will serve as acting envoy, President Obama said.

USIP’s Scott Lasensky says the headline about Mitchell’s departure isn’t about Mitchell himself as much as it is the public policy questions it raises.

“Will the U.S. put forward a new approach that fills the space created by the collapse of peace talks in the fall, a new policy that ties together the pursuit of peace with the sweeping changes now reshaping the Arab world?”

President Obama’s upcoming speech is expected to be a “fresh outreach to the Muslim world” in the wake of the operation against bin Laden, according to The Wall Street Journal, which first reported on the president’s speech May 11. White House officials say the president would use the speech to put the death of bin Laden into a broader political context amidst the uprisings across the Arab world. “While Al Qaeda’s influence has been ebbing in the Middle East for years, these officials said, Bin Laden’s death punctuates the terrorist group’s growing irrelevance,” The New York Times reported May 13.

Wright believes Obama must seize the day. Says Wright: “this is a time that the United States should be investing new energy, leverage and resources into both the problems and potential in the Middle East,” Wright says. “Mitchell will be missed.”

Watch a video of Senator George J. Mitchell as he delivers the 2010 United States Institute of Peace Dean Acheson Lecture in May 2010.


Related Publications

Iran’s Attack and the New Escalatory Cycle in the Middle East

Iran’s Attack and the New Escalatory Cycle in the Middle East

Tuesday, April 16, 2024

The Middle East is entering a new phase after unprecedented attacks by Israel and Iran during the first two weeks of April. Robin Wright, a senior fellow at USIP and the Woodrow Wilson Center who has covered the region for a half century, explores what happened, the strategic implications, the political context and the divided world reaction.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

The Growing Flashpoints Between the U.S. and Iran

The Growing Flashpoints Between the U.S. and Iran

Wednesday, April 10, 2024

Tension between Washington and Tehran has been a growing undercurrent of the war in Gaza, even as both countries tried to prevent it from sparking a direct confrontation during the first six months of fighting. Robin Wright, a joint fellow at USIP and the Wilson Center, explores the evolving flashpoints in the world’s most volatile region as well as the challenges for U.S. diplomacy, the new triggers for a wider regional conflagration and the historical backdrop.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

As Hezbollah-Israel Tensions Simmer, Lebanon’s Domestic Crises Drag On

As Hezbollah-Israel Tensions Simmer, Lebanon’s Domestic Crises Drag On

Monday, April 1, 2024

Nearly six months after Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel, tensions in two key flashpoints — Lebanon and Syria — continue to rise with significant Israeli airstrikes in both countries, leading to the highest death tolls in each country since October 7. Amid these rising tensions, ongoing clashes between the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) threaten to escalate into a wider war. At the same time, Lebanon continues to reel from a series of crises that have unfolded over the past four and a half years, highlighting Lebanon’s perilous position as the Gaza conflict continues to reverberate throughout the region.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

What Does the U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution Mean for the Israel-Gaza War?

What Does the U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution Mean for the Israel-Gaza War?

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

On March 25, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 2728, calling for an “immediate” cease-fire in Gaza. The motion’s passage came after weeks of back and forth and posturing among the UNSC’s permanent and rotating members. The exact phrasing of the resolution and its relevance to the situation on the ground, as well as bilateral and multilateral relations — particularly U.S.-Israel ties — have been the subject of heavy public and media attention since Monday, raising questions about the resolution’s subtext, intent and limitations. USIP’s Robert Barron looks at these questions.

Type: Question and Answer

Global PolicyPeace Processes

View All Publications