Negotiations During Camp David Accord, Essay Example

Introduction

On January 20th 1977 the new President Carter moved swiftly to try and re-establish the Middle East Peace Treaty.  This process had stalled during the 1976 presidential campaign and subsequently  the position had deteriorated.  Carter had already visited many Heads of State that would be required to support the peace process and be instrumental in reaching an agreement.  President Sadat of Egypt was keen on finding a solution to this problem, despite the fact that more extremist groups in the Arab world threatened terrorist reprisals against Egypt.  Sadat spoke to the Israeli assembly at the Knesset and sought implementation of resolutions 242 and 338.  This resulted in establishing a further summit meeting in Cairo and ultimately led to the Camp David Accords.

The secret talks at Camp David commenced on  September 5th 1978 and lasted thirteen days in intense gruelling debates.  The determination of President Carter and insistence that nobody left until an agreement was reached, attributed largely to the success of this meeting. During the course of the negotiations both Egypt and Israeli delegations wanted to walk away.  President carter proved to be a highly influential negotiator and arbitrator in repeatedly getting each party back to the discussion table.  Carter had to introduce what has become known as shuttle diplomacy, talking to each party 1:1 and sharing views with the other party, owing to the fact that Begin and Sadat were not on speaking terms.  The impasse was caused by the Israeli stance on the position of the occupied West Bank and withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Sinai peninsula.  Whereas Sadat wanted all settlements to be removed from the Sinai Peninsula.

President Carter took both parties to the Gettysburg National Military Park showing them the implications of the American Civil War as a comparison to their own situation.

Goals and Planning of the Meeting

There were two distinct sides of the Camp David agreement, resulting from the planned negotiations:

1. A comprehensive framework for peace in the Middle East and
2. A framework for the conclusion of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel

The goals of the meeting would be based upon the following:

• An agreed basis for a peaceful settlement of the conflict between Israel and its neighbours is United Nations Security Council Resolution 242;
• The peoples of the Middle East have endured 4 wars lasting some 30 years. They need to find a solution to a lasting peace so that they can exist in an atmosphere of cooperation and coexistence in order to bring prosperity to the nations of the Middle East;
• The reciprocal visits to each others countries, as carried out by the Egyptian President and the Israeli Prime Minister, were warmly greeted by the peoples of both nations. An opportunity that must not be lost to protect future generations of both nations, sparing them the terrible consequences of war
• To achieve a relationship of peace under Article 2 of the United Nations
• Progress of movement towards a goal of mutual respect for each countries sovereign rights and the right to live in peace within their territorial boundaries. Free from acts of aggression by external forces or others that seek to destabilize the peace process.
• Enhanced security relationships that will benefit both parties that may include demilitarized zones, limited armaments areas, early warning stations, the presence of international forces, liaison, agreed measures for monitoring and other arrangements that they agree are useful  (Israel)

The Players Involved in the Meeting

Muhammad Anwar al-Sadat, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt, and Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel, met with Jimmy Carter, President of the United States of America, at Camp David from September 5 to September 17, 1978, and have agreed on the following framework for peace in the Middle East. They invite other parties to the Arab-Israel conflict to adhere to it. (Israel)

Other important players included:

Secretary of State: Cyrus Vance

National  Security Advisor: Zbigniew Brzezinski

Circumstances Surrounding the Meeting

Israel and Egypt had experienced 4 wars in 30 years and a bloody conflict over territorial disputes and the rights of the Palestinian people.  The conflict had spilled over into other Arab league nations including the Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. There seemed to be an impasse in negotiations that seemed to galvanize during the year of the 1976 presidential elections.  This deepening of the crisis seemed now to be threatening the entire peace of the Middle East and potentially destabilizing that region.

Essentially it was President Sadat of Egypt that initiated the formal commencement of peace negotiations by his unprecedented visit to Israel and his address to the Israeli Knesset on 21st November 1977. He was the first ever Head of an Arab state to visit Israel.  It was President Carters invitation to both Heads of State to attend the Camp David Summit on September 5th 1978.  The negotiations were concluded by the signing of two historical agreements at the Whitehouse and witnessed by President Carter.  ” The agreements were based on UN resolutions 242 and 338, and were meant to constitute a basis for peace between Egypt and Israel, as well as to reach “a just, comprehensive, and durable settlement of the Middle East conflict” for all neighbours willing to negotiate with Israel.”  (Anon)

The Positions of Each Side

The issues primarily were over the plight of the Palestinian people and their considered rights in the Arabic  league of Nations.  The Arabs view them as an occupied race and Israel to be the transgressors.  This being further compounded by Israel creating settlements on what they believe to be Palestinian land ( The West Bank and Sinai Peninsula).  Equally Egypt’s concern over a heavy military presence in the Sinai that potentially threatens the Suez Canal and passage of trade through that route.  An impasse had been reached because neither party would move from their respective positions.  Equally the steps towards a peaceful resolution were not entirely appreciated by all members of the Arabic alliance and particularly that of Iran and Iraq.  This later created a power vacuum that Sadaam Hussein of Iraq tried to bring about when he invaded Kuwait.  This dangerous situation widened the conflict and eventually resulted in the USA and its western allies ending Sadaams brutal regime. (W.STEIN)

The Events That Took Place at the Meeting

The Strategies of Each Side

Israel wanted to retain its land and settlement in both the West Bank and Sinai Peninsula.  Egypt demanded a withdrawal from both locations and as such a stalemate situation existed.  Initially neither side was prepared to compromise.  Ultimately President Carter brought them to the basis of an historical agreement.  One of the main difficulties occurred on the 10th day of the talks when both the Israeli and Egyptian leader wanted to end the talks and leave.  President Carter elected to try and salvage the agreement by extending it into a further 3 days of talks. He was placed in the awkward position of trying to concede to Begins position of settlement on the West Bank while supporting Sadats position on removal of settlements in the Sinai peninsula.  Carter continued the negotiations for an additional 3 days and reached an agreed position.

This position was significant to the Arab world because it proved for the first time that Israel could be negotiated with and the possibility of finding common ground could be achieved. The more extreme factions of the Arab world despised President Sadat for this.  (Lorenz)

Other International Parties Impacted

The final results of the Treaty of Camp David impacted a significant number of other nations.  These issues were primarily dealt with through the auspices of the United Nations.  Some examples of  influence on other countries included:

• Jordan: Trading routes were once again opened between Egypt and Jordan, bringing increased prosperity to both countries;
• All nations: The Suez Canal guarantees freedom of passage and restores normal diplomatic relations with Egypt;
• Lebanon: More Troops would be freed up to protect Israel’s  Northern border. Lebanon would have to assume more direct responsibility for acts of terrorism conducted against Israel;
• Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia: Both Egypt and Israel would be given financial military aid to substantially upgrade its military capability, essentially changing the balance of power in the Middle East. (Flamhaft)

Analysis of the Events

As a result of the Camp David Accord the following outcomes were achieved:

• Restoration of relationships between Egypt and Israel  in January 1980;
• Re-establishment of Ambassadors in both countries;
• The perception of Egypt in the Arab world changed resulting in Egypt being suspended in 1979, an expulsion that lasted 10 years;
• The position of Egypt disintegrated the popular Arab united front against Israel;
• In an Egyptian poll in 2006 it was reported that 92% of Egyptians  view Israel as an enemy state.
• Perhaps the biggest success was that of the peace initiative itself.  The fact that Begin, Carter and Sadat had successfully reached an agreed position was an anathema to the Arab league of nations.  They despised Israel and the thought of a key member brokering a peace agreement with their enemy was unthinkable.

President Carters Mediation Strategy

President Carter adopted a strategy of  shuttle diplomacy ; the concept of holding 1:1 discussions with each of the leaders on their own.  He relayed the different points of view between each of the leaders, thereby presenting any loss of face or hostility between the two.  This 3 days of intense diplomatic activity enabled the President to argue for each sides respective points of view and ultimately arrive at compromise positions that would be acceptable by either party.  This success was attributed to the perseverance of the President and his determination to reach a break through and agreement, thereby breaking the deadlock and proving that an agreement was possible.  (JUREIDINI)

The Results of the Meeting

From this time to date, we have seen sustained peace between Egypt and Israel and some have likened it to the cold war.   In addition, the situation in the Middle East has not improved a great deal. We have witnessed the Invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, the disintegration of Iraq, the push of the Iranians towards nuclear weapons, a massive increase in terrorist activity throughout the region and a deterioration in the Palestinian problem.  The region continues to be both volatile and unstable.  This has become compounded by troubles in satellite regions – increased terrorism activities in Aden,  Piracy from the Sudan/Somalia region, conflict in Afghanistan and civil unrest in Pakistan caused by an increase in Terrorism and the Taliban. (THORNTON)

Concluding Remarks

There is no question that the search for an enduring peace in the Middle East is an elusive one. To this day we are still building upon the foundation blocks of the Camp David Accord.  At the time of writing the former US President Bill Clinton is in Israel marking the memorial of the assassination of the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. The former President stated  “In the last 14 years, not a single week has gone by that I did not think of Yitzhak Rabin and miss him terribly,”  (Berger).   Mr Clinton was the president when Mr. Rabin was assassinated by an orthodox jew for giving certain lands back to the Palestinians.  Mr. Rabin continuing the ongoing peace process and determination of a peaceful settlement to the Palestinian problem.

In a sort of strange irony, Mr Clinton  presided over a second Camp David Summit in the Year 2000 as he attempted a similar approach to that of President Carters inaugral summit.

“Five years after the assassination, Mr. Clinton made one last-ditch effort for a final peace agreement at the Camp David Summit near Washington in the year 2000. He brought then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak together with the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for two weeks of intensive talks, but the summit failed. Two months later the Second Palestinian Uprising erupted and the peace process collapsed in a wave of violence. ”  (Berger)

Other countries have tried to support the Middle East peace process and the European Union appointed a special envoy in Mr. Tony Blaire ( former Prime Minister of Great Britain). Unfortunately Mr. Blaire has not accomplished a great deal in this role, which some attribute to Middle Eastern opinion on his stance towards the war in Iraq.  Despite the individual efforts the European position is one of reconciliation with two key objectives:

• The EU’s objective is a two-state solution with an independent, democratic, viable Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel and its other neighbours.
• The EU considers that peace in the Middle East requires a comprehensive solution. In this regard the EU welcomed the announcement in May 2008 that peace talks between Syria and Israel were to resume peace negotiations through Turkish mediation. These indirect talks are currently suspended.  (Commission)

The most recent initiative being in 2002 put forward by the 22 nations in the Arab League and endorsed by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia as the road to an enduring peace: ” Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land-for-peace principle, and Israel’s acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.”  (Anon, Arab Peace Initiative 2002)

A stance hardly likely to be accepted by the Israelis who regard Jerusalem as biblical sovereign territory of the State of Israel and is non negotiable in any peace treaty.  Hence the enduring saga continues.

Works Cited

Anon. Arab Peace Initiative 2002. 18 6 2009. 14 11 2009 <http://www.al-bab.com/Arab/docs/league/peace02.htm>.

—. Palestinian Facts. 2009. 14 11 2011 <http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_egypt_campdavid_1978.php>.

Berger, Robert. Former President Clinton Calls for Peace on Visit to Israel . 15 11 2009. 14 11 2011.

Commission, EU. The EU and Middle East Peace Process. 2009. 14 11 2009 <http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/mepp/index_en.htm>.

Flamhaft, Ziva. “Israel on the road to peace : Accepting the unacceptable.” Flamhaft, Ziva. Israel on the road to peace : Accepting the unacceptable. Boulder Co: Harper Collins, 1996.

Israel, The State of. The Camp David Accords. 1999. 14 11 2011 <http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/camp_david_eng.htm>.

Jureidini, Paul A. “Beyond Camp David Emerging Alignments and Leaders .” Jureidini, Paul A. Beyond Camp David Emerging Alignments and Leaders .Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1981.

Lorenz, Joseph P. “Egypt and the Arabs : Foreign Policy and the Identity.” Lorenz, Joseph P. Egypt and the Arabs : Foreign Policy and the Identity. Boulder Co: Westview Press, 1990. 184.

Thornton, Richard C. “Toward a New Global Order : The Carter Years.” Thornton, Richard C. Toward a New Global Order : The Carter Years. New York: Paragon House, 1981.

W.Stein, Kenneth. “Heroic Diplomacy.” W.Stein, Kenneth. Heroic Diplomacy. New York: Routledge, 1999. 324.