Regiopolitics: Toward a U.S. Policy on the Palestine Problem
Unlike the Carter Administration (with the Brookings Report), the new Administration has not come into office with any known general policy framework of its own for the settlement of the Palestine problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict. In addition to the priority accorded by President Reagan to the domestic economy, the fact that the Israeli elections were to be held on June 30 served to purchase additional time. Nonetheless, the emerging indicators of what the new Administration's policy might be give cause for concern to some observers of the Middle East scene.
Walid Khalidi, who was born in Jerusalem, Palestine, is Professor of Political Studies at the American University of Beirut, Lebanon. Since 1978 he has been a visiting Professor of Government at Harvard University, and is the author of Conflict and Violence in Lebanon: Confrontation in the Middle East.
Unlike the Carter Administration (with the Brookings Report), the new Administration has not come into office with any known general policy framework of its own for the settlement of the Palestine problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict. In addition to the priority accorded by President Reagan to the domestic economy, the fact that the Israeli elections were to be held on June 30 served to purchase additional time. Nonetheless, the emerging indicators of what the new Administration's policy might be give cause for concern to some observers of the Middle East scene.
Secretary of State Alexander Haig's delaying tactics in going out to the Middle East rather than face the problem of which Middle East leaders-and in what sequence-to invite to an unprepared Washington were astute. His trip will have provided him with a privileged tourist's insights into the attitudes of key countries he was visiting for the first time as the principal guest. But the predominantly geopolitical lens through which he views the Middle East (along with the rest of the world) can only heighten concern. Without as yet having scrutinized the contents of the Middle East box (including, inter alia, the Palestine problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict), Mr. Haig proposes to wrap it in a "strategic consensus" between the Israelis and the Arabs in the face of the U.S.S.R.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Palestinian critique of US and Israeli policy concludes that "a Palestinian state in the occupied territories within the 1967 frontiers in peaceful coexistence alongside Israel is the only 'conceptual' candidate for a historical compromise". For French version see 'Vers la paix en Terre Sainte' Politique Etrangère 53/2 Summer 1988 pp349-364, 1 ref.
The relative ease of the Gaza withdrawal has fooled many observers into thinking that the Palestinian Authority can now concentrate on consolidating its hold over the territory. Washington and its allies are pushing hard for the PA to do so. But everyone is ignoring the West Bank, where chaos is quickly mounting. If wide-scale violence erupts there, it could quickly bury the entire peace process.
In view of the political complexities of Jerusalem, what is the most desirable course of action that Israel's national authorities should take in regard to the city that is of such central concern to Jews, Christians and Muslims?
