Buchanan on U.S. Interests and Israeli-Arab Tensions

In response to Jeane Kirkpatrick’s column “Why Bush Needs Clearer Vision for Middle East Peace Plan,” Commentary, May 23:

Kirkpatrick’s comments raise an important question: What is obstructing the way to achieve this vision?

Shamir refused to implement his proposal to hold an election in the West Bank and Gaza, in spite of all the U.S. and Egyptian efforts to start a dialogue between the Palestinians and Israelis aimed to bridge the gap in positions, and to explore ways to settle the conflict once and for all.

Furthermore, the Israeli policy of continuing to build new settlements in the occupied territories represents an obstacle to peace. It is an illegal action according to international law which prohibits an occupying power from changing the geographical character or demographic composition or the legal status of occupied territories.

New settlements mean displacement of Palestinians from their homes and land, and open the doors to the newcomers to create a “Bigger Israel.”

The objective is to reach a historic reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis that would put an end to conflict and destruction. It will also pave the way for economic cooperation and coexistence between the two parties.

Concessions are expected from both sides, to build bridges to live side by side guaranteeing the security of Israel and the rights of the Palestinian people. When the peace process starts, all other side issues which Kirkpatrick talks about will be resolved. Iraq is on record as being willing to accept a peace settlement. And Syria as well is willing to reach a peaceful settlement. (Needless to say that all the Arab countries will follow.)

Indeed there is a very urgent need to stop the use of violence against civilians in the West Bank and Gaza, and to start negotiations in good faith.

NABIL ELORABI

Consulate General of Egypt

San Francisco