There’s No Time for Mideast Equivocation : U.S. Must Support Israel’s Election Plan or Lose the Fading Chance for Peace

President Bush and Secretary of State James A. Baker III must take tangible steps to demonstrate both American resolve and staying power in pursuit of peace in the Middle East. Otherwise, a conflict still ripe for resolution will grow ever more desperate, with disastrous consequences for U.S. interests.

I saw several faces of the intifada during a recent trip to the Mideast--in meetings with Gazan refugees, with West Bank notables and in traveling with the Israel Defense Forces to the West Bank city of Nablus. These visits, and conversations with people at all levels of Israeli society, convinced me that the need for U.S. action is urgent.

In particular, Baker should visit Israel and other key Middle East states, not with a new American plan but to give impetus to the Israeli peace plan, which calls for free and democratic elections of and by Palestinians in the territories. Both the President and secretary of state have appropriately embraced this plan, but it could wither without a U.S. initiative to revive it.

There is a growing belief that the United States is losing interest in Israel’s peace plan and in the broader peace process, emboldening extremists who prefer the status quo to a settlement. A new American initiative in support of the Israeli plan could reverse this belief and also serve to secure long-overdue cooperation from Arab states in the peace process.

Palestinians and Israelis have hardened their views toward each other because of the intifada. Hopes for a political resolution have become smothered in violence, fear and resentment. Residents of Jabaliya (a Gaza refugee camp) with whom I spoke bitterly condemned Israeli and American policy and dogmatically asserted that Jews have neither rights nor historical claims to any of Jerusalem. However, these same individuals claimed to accept Palestinian coexistence alongside Israel provided it was from within a state of theirown.

The Israeli troops took me to the volatile “casbah” section of Nablus. There, I was shown where a boulder had crushed an Israeli soldier and where another had recently been shot. All the while, I was on the receiving end of stones thrown by Nablus youths. When I asked if these conditions warranted either a reduction or withdrawal of the Israeli presence, military officials replied that previous withdrawals had resulted in greater Palestinian terror, against both their own people and Israelis on the roads near Nablus.

Finally, meetings with West Bank Palestinians convinced me that their desire to move the diplomatic process forward was being frustrated by the Palestine Liberation Organization, with the result that extremists increasingly imposed their will on those espousing more moderate views or those with whom they had scores to settle. Yasser Arafat recently reaffirmed his support for the odious policy of killing “collaborators,” which has already resulted in more than 100 deaths.

The situation will deteriorate further if there is no significant movement toward a political solution. Both Israelis and responsible Palestinians are looking to the United States as the only party that can provide a way out of the impasse.

In this context, Egypt cannot substitute for America in bringing the parties together. Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s visit to Egypt can help move the process along if it leads to warmer Egyptian-Israeli relations, to a meeting between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, and if it is understood that Egypt has not proposedits own “plan,” or “initiative,” but simply questions to clarify the Israeli plan.

The Administration, however, must demonstrate more dexterous diplomacy. Among Israelis especially there is confusion over the depth of America’s stated commitment to their initiative and the manner in which the Administration has so far attempted to support it, as well as disappointment over failure to produce Palestinian acceptance of the plan.

There have been too many maladroit U.S. actions--Baker’s speech in May, appearing to distance the United States from Israel; the disclosure of intensified U.S.-PLO dialogue days before the Likud Party convention in July; hints of U.S. support for an international peace conference. These inadvertently assisted Likud hard-liners who successfully argued that Shamir had obtained nothing from Bush and Baker for his peace plan except criticism. These same actions heartened Palestinian extremists whose goals lie less in a realistic diplomatic dialogue than in driving a wedge between the United States and Israel.

The Bush Administration is at a critical juncture in its Mideast policy. It can make the region a high priority, a path fraught with risk and calling for a significant investment of time and energy, but with great gain to U.S. interests and prestige if it succeeds. Or, it can relegate the issue to the back burner, undermining those interests. American inaction--or continued American fumbling--will lead eventually not just to deterioration but potentially to a new and more devastating form of armed conflict that would be difficult to stop.

A trip to the Middle East by the secretary of state--demonstrating an unflagging U.S. commitment to the Israeli peace plan--would give both sides a way out of the morass.