DOCSLIB.ORG

A Comparative Analysis of the Diplomatic History of the Bilateral and Multilateral Middle East Peace Negotiations from 2000 to 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Comparative Analysis of the Diplomatic History of the Bilateral and Multilateral Middle East Peace Negotiations from 2000 to 2017 Paths to Peace: A Comparative Analysis of the Diplomatic History of the Bilateral and Multilateral Middle East Peace Negotiations from 2000 to 2017. Jonathan Ghariani UCL Hebrew and Jewish Studies PhD 1 I, Jonathan Ghariani, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Abstract The Arab-Israeli peace process has been the subject of much debate in the field of international politics. Most peace efforts in the Middle East have taken the form of bilateral negotiations and have led to breakthroughs on a number of issues, most notably the establishment of diplomatic relations between Israel and Egypt as a result of the Camp David Accord. However, while the bilateral approach has mainly been successful in solving territorial conflicts between sovereign states, it has proven much less successful in dealing with more intractable issues of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, such as the status of Jerusalem, the refugee issue and questions relating to national identity. The role of third-party mediators, mainly the United States, is also heavily debated. Historically, attempts to pursue the multilateral tract have been foiled by the refusal of the Arab states to recognize Israel, as well as Israel’s fear that it would be outnumbered in any multilateral negotiations and so pressured by Arabs states into making concessions on sensitive issues, such as the fate of the Palestinian refugees. The Madrid peace process was the first round of multilateral talks between Israel and the wider Arab world, excluding Syria and Lebanon. Despite initial success, these talks ended in failure and were terminated in January 2000. In March 2002 the Arab League adopted the Arab Peace Initiative (API), which explicitly recognized Israel for the first time. However, some major points of contention remain between Israel and the Arab states, mainly on the issue of refugees, as the API insists on a settlement based on United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194. Nowadays, there is a convergence of interests between Israel and moderate Arab states – such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states – related to the rise of Iranian influence in the Middle East. This convergence could pave the way for Arab regional involvement in the peace process. This thesis will address the diplomatic history of the final status negotiations that took place between Israel and the Palestinian Authority from the second Camp David summit of July 2000 to the Kerry sponsored negotiations of 2013-2014. It will assess the various factors that led to the failure of these negotiations. Additionally, this thesis will address the regional dimension of the peace process, focusing on the API and the current regional context of rapprochement between Israel and most of the Gulf states. In particular, the escalation of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran has led to an unprecedented convergence of interest Escalating tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran has led to an alignment of interests between Israel and Riyadh. This new regional landscape could pave the way to a normalization of relations between Israel and moderate Arab states provided some progress is achieved in the Israeli Palestinian peace process. 3 In contrast to the bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, a limited amount of research has been conducted on the multilateral/regional aspect of the peace process and how such a framework could be more conducive to final status negotiations. This thesis will contribute to this body of knowledge on the Arab-Israeli conflict by thoroughly assessing the multilateral/regional proposals for achieving a lasting peace. 4 Impact Statement The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has a significant impact on various areas and remains until today a highly sensitive topic of utmost importance. The knowledge that I have accumulated over the course of my research could help scholars specializing in the fields of political science and modern history to better grasp the complexity of the Arab-Israeli peace process; more particularly, it could help them better appreciate the multilateral dimension of the peace process, which has not been tackled in depth in the academic sphere. Israeli and Arab policymakers working on the peace process could also benefit from my research. My thesis provides an in-depth analysis of all the Israeli-Palestinian final status negotiations that have taken place from July 2000 to 2014 and includes direct accounts from participants involved in these negotiations. It primarily relies on a diplomatic history approach, and it is also informed by elements of conflict resolution and current affairs. Scholars specializing in modern history, international relations, conflict resolution and Middle East studies will therefore have access to a substantive research paper on the Arab-Israel peace process, one that will provide scholars with new insights on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. In contrast to the bilateral negotiations, the multilateral dimension of the peace process has not previously been covered in depth. My thesis will provide scholars with a comparative analysis of the bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and the proposed multilateral or regional framework. In the arena of policymaking, my thesis could assist Arab and Israeli decisionmakers in their efforts to solve the conflict. The thesis is by no mean a blueprint for resolving the Israeli- Palestinian conflict but rather a substantive piece of research on the diplomatic history of all Israeli-Palestinian final status negotiations and the multilateral/regional aspect of the peace process. The thesis could help Arab and Israeli policymakers in advancing the peace process. Furthermore, third party mediators could potentially rely on my thesis, as my work offers an in-depth assessment of the failure of previous US administrations to mediate a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the three rounds of final status negotiations. Finally, research institutions such as think tanks specializing on the Arab-Israeli affairs could draw on my thesis to find new avenues and recommendations for solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It could help them produce policy and research papers on this subject. Additionally, the findings of my thesis could inform research institutions that are focused on other international conflicts. 5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 9 Introduction 10 Chapter 1 Assessing the Secondary Source Material on the Arab-Israeli Peace Process 42 1 Filling a Gap in the Existing Literature 42 2 Historical Analysis of the Arab-Israeli Conflict and the Peace Process 44 3 The Role of Third-Party Mediators in the Peace Process 62 4 Regional-Multilateral Approaches based on Madrid and the API 67 5 The Regional Balance of Power in the Middle East 75 6 Conclusion 78 Chapter 2 The Diplomatic History of the Bilateral Approach to the Peace Process: From Camp David to Taba, 2000-2001 81 1 Introduction 81 2 The Camp David Summit: Broken Taboo and Failure 83 (A) The Context and Atmosphere Surrounding the Summit 83 (B) The Issues of Security, Borders, and Settlements 94 (C) The Complexity and Sensitivity of the Refugee Issue 103 (D) The Status of Jerusalem: The Deal Killer 108 3 The Clinton Parameters and the Taba Summit 127 (A) The Clinton Parameters: A Belated US Plan for Peace 127 (B) The Taba Summit: Significant Progress but No Breakthrough 135 4 Conclusion 141 Chapter 3 The Arab Peace Initiative: A Non-Starter or a Missed Opportunity? 144 1 Introduction 144 2 Historical Background: The Evolution of the API, 2002-2013 147 (A) The birth of the API 147 (B) The US and Israeli Response to the Plan 152 3 The API in the Context of a New Regional Landscape, 2007-2013: A Missed Opportunity? 156 6 (A) The API Back on the Table 156 (B) Basis for Discussion vs Diktat: A Missed Opportunity? 158 4 Conclusion 187 Chapter 4 The Annapolis Final Status Negotiations: A Missed Opportunity for Greater Regional Involvement? 190 1 Introduction 190 2 The Annapolis Process: A Last Attempt to Broker Peace between Israelis and Palestinians 192 (A) The Context Preceding Annapolis 192 (B) The Rise of Hamas and the Islamist Ideology in the Palestinian Territories 195 (C) The Annapolis Conference: Resumption of Final Status Negotiations 196 3 Olmert’s Final Status Peace Plan and the Palestinian Response 201 (A) The Resumption of Final Status Negotiations. 201 (B) The Annapolis Denouement: Olmert’s Final Peace Plan and the Lack of a Palestinian Response 204 4 An Assessment of the Annapolis Process 208 (A) Another Futile Attempt or a Missed Opportunity? 208 (B) US Attempts at Mediation: An Important or Marginal Factor in the Negotiations? 228 (C) A Missed Opportunity for a Regional Peace Settlement to the Conflict? 232 5 Conclusion 236 Chapter 5 A Comparative Analysis of the US Mediator Role During the First and Second Camp David Summits. 239 1 Introduction 239 2 Camp David 1, September 1978: The Active Involvement of the Carter Administration 241 (A) The Historical Context Preceding the first Camp David Summit and the Subsequent Lack of Progress in the Israeli-Egyptian Bilateral Negotiations 241 (B) The Carter Administration’s Active Mediation Approach at Camp David 244 (C) American Bridging Proposals on the Table 253 (D) A Missed Opportunity for a Regional Framework for Peace? 255 3 Camp David 2: The Clinton Administration’s Facilitating Approach 256 (A) A Lack of Preparation Before the Summit 256
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Student Officers: President: Mohamed El Habbak Chairs: Adam Beblawy, Ibrahim Shoukry
    Forum: Security Council Issue: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict Student Officers: President: Mohamed El Habbak Chairs: Adam Beblawy, Ibrahim Shoukry Introduction: Beginning in the mid-20th century, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the still continuing dispute between Israel and Palestine and part of the larger Arab-Israeli conflict, and is known as the world’s “most intractable conflict.” Despite efforts to reach long-term peace, both parties have failed to reach a final agreement. The crux of the problem lies in a few major points including security, borders, water rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, Palestinian freedom of movement, and Palestinian right of return. Furthermore, a hallmark of the conflict is the level of violence for practically the entirety of the conflict, which hasn’t been confined only to the military, but has been prevalent in civilian populations. The main solution proposed to end the conflict is the two-state solution, which is supported by the majority of Palestinians and Israelis. However, no consensus has been reached and negotiations are still underway to this day. The gravity of this conflict is significant as lives are on the line every day, multiple human rights violations take place frequently, Israel has an alleged nuclear arsenal, and the rise of some terroristic groups and ideologies are directly linked to it. Key Terms: Gaza Strip: Region of Palestine under Egyptian control. Balfour Declaration: British promise to the Jewish people to create a sovereign state for them. Golan Heights: Syrian territory under Israeli control. West Bank: Palestinian sovereign territory under Jordanian protection. Focused Overview: To understand this struggle, one must examine the origins of each group’s claim to the land.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Two-State Solution
    PolicyWatch #1408 : Special Forum Report Rethinking the Two-State Solution Featuring Giora Eiland and Martin Indyk October 3, 2008 On September 23, 2008, Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Giora Eiland and Ambassador Martin Indyk addressed a Policy Forum luncheon at The Washington Institute. General Eiland is former head of the Israeli National Security Council and currently a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. Ambassador Indyk directs the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. The following is a rapporteur’s summary of their remarks. GIORA EILAND Within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies a paradox. Although the two-state solution is well known and widely accepted, and although there is international consensus regarding the need for it, little progress has been made to that end. This means that neither side desires the solution nor is willing to take the necessary risks to move forward and come to an agreement. Ultimately, the most the Israeli government can offer the Palestinians -- and survive politically -- is far less than what any Palestinian leadership can accept. As such, there is a gap between the two sides that continues to widen as the years go on. In many aspects, the current situation is worse than it was eight years ago. In 2000, there were three leaders who were both determined and capable of reaching an agreement: U.S. president Bill Clinton, Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. That type of leadership is missing today. In addition, while the two sides enjoyed a reasonable level of security, cooperation, and trust in 2000, the subsequent intifada has created a completely different situation on the ground today.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Policy in the Middle East Martin Indyk
    U.S. Policy in the Middle East Martin Indyk s much as the Obama administration would challenge to the Alawite regime in Syria but has now like to disengage from the Middle East and spread viciously to Iraq and could well spread to the Ashift its focus and energies to Asia—above all Gulf where a majority Shiite population in Bahrain to India and China—it finds itself constantly sucked is controlled by a Saudi-backed Sunni monarch, and back into the vortex as the region grows ever more in Yemen, where Shia Houti tribesman are challeng- volatile, chaotic, and dangerous . President Obama has ing a Sunni regime in Sana’a . Saudi Arabia—the been determined to end American involvement in the world’s largest oil producer—now faces instability country’s two longest-running wars—Iraq and Afghan- on almost all its borders . istan—and to avoid involvement in any other region- al conflicts, especially the Syrian civil war . And yet, In Egypt, the traditional leader of the Arab world, a the surprising success of the Islamic State of Iraq and military-backed regime has deposed and suppressed the Levant (ISIL) in taking control of broad swathes the Muslim Brotherhood party, generating an ad- of Syrian and Iraqi territory and the threat it poses to ditional schism across the region between Islamist Baghdad in the south, Erbil in Iraqi Kurdistan, and po- and moderate Sunnis . This tension recently spilled tentially Jordan in the west, have forced the president’s over into the Arab-Israeli arena where Hamas, the hand and led him now to order air strikes on northern stepchild of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, at- Iraq .
    [Show full text]
  • August 2011 Postcard
    postcard_marchapril_2020.qxp_MARCH APRIL 2020 Postcard 1/29/20 10:06 AM Page 2 ¡ DEAR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: PLACE You have repeatedly boasted of your skills as a negotiator. If you were the You may wish leader of Palestine, would you view the recently released Israel-Palestine 35¢ “peace plan” as a serious overture? Of course not! Any negotiator would STAMP hastily dismiss a proposal that only reflects one side’s interests. How does HERE to send these this deal advance peace? It’s clear this proposal will not lead to a peace set- tlement and could only result in a worsening divide and more violence and injustice. What does the U.S. get out of this deal? Nothing but the promise of greater global distrust. This proposal cards to forgoes any sense of partiality and signals an almost complete acquiescence to Israeli desires. So much for putting “America First.” President TO: Donald Trump PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, NW and the WASHINGTON, DC 20500 Senator and ¡ Representative DEAR SENATOR: PLACE It’s painfully clear to objective observers that President Trump’s Israel- Palestine “peace plan” is simply a green light for Israel to do as it wishes. 35¢ in whose The plan embarrassingly forgoes any premise of U.S. impartiality and puts a STAMP blind rubber stamp on Israel’s desire to annex the West Bank and exert its HERE control over Palestinians. How does this deal advance peace? It’s clear this constituency proposal will not lead to a peace settlement and could only result in a worsening divide and more violence and injustice.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Security Council Seventy-First Session Seventy-First Year Items 15, 17, 34, 60, 109 and 127 of the Provisional Agenda*
    United Nations A/71/366–S/2016/723 General Assembly Distr.: General 23 August 2016 Security Council Original: English General Assembly Security Council Seventy-first session Seventy-first year Items 15, 17, 34, 60, 109 and 127 of the provisional agenda* The role of the United Nations in promoting a new global human order Macroeconomic policy questions The situation in the Middle East Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources Measures to eliminate international terrorism Cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations Letter dated 19 August 2016 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Mauritania to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General I have the honour to forward to you a letter dated 14 August 2016 from the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, to which are attached the resolutions issued by the Arab League Council at its 27th ordinary session, held at the summit level in Nouakchott on 25 July 2016 (see annex). I should be grateful if the present letter and its annex could be circulated as a document of the seventy-first session of the General Assembly, under items 15, 17, 34, 60, 109 and 127 of the provisional agenda, and of the Security Council. (Signed) El Hacen Eleyatt Chargé d’affaires a.i. Chairman of the 27th ordinary session of the Arab League Council held at the summit level in Mauritania on 25 July 2016 * A/71/150.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel: Growing Pains at 60
    Viewpoints Special Edition Israel: Growing Pains at 60 The Middle East Institute Washington, DC Middle East Institute The mission of the Middle East Institute is to promote knowledge of the Middle East in Amer- ica and strengthen understanding of the United States by the people and governments of the region. For more than 60 years, MEI has dealt with the momentous events in the Middle East — from the birth of the state of Israel to the invasion of Iraq. Today, MEI is a foremost authority on contemporary Middle East issues. It pro- vides a vital forum for honest and open debate that attracts politicians, scholars, government officials, and policy experts from the US, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. MEI enjoys wide access to political and business leaders in countries throughout the region. Along with information exchanges, facilities for research, objective analysis, and thoughtful commentary, MEI’s programs and publications help counter simplistic notions about the Middle East and America. We are at the forefront of private sector public diplomacy. Viewpoints are another MEI service to audiences interested in learning more about the complexities of issues affecting the Middle East and US rela- tions with the region. To learn more about the Middle East Institute, visit our website at http://www.mideasti.org The maps on pages 96-103 are copyright The Foundation for Middle East Peace. Our thanks to the Foundation for graciously allowing the inclusion of the maps in this publication. Cover photo in the top row, middle is © Tom Spender/IRIN, as is the photo in the bottom row, extreme left.
    [Show full text]
  • Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North the Role of the Arab States Africa Programme
    Briefing Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North The Role of the Arab States Africa Programme Yossi Mekelberg Summary and Greg Shapland • The positions of several Arab states towards Israel have evolved greatly in the past 50 years. Four of these states in particular – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and (to a lesser extent) Jordan – could be influential in shaping the course of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. • In addition to Egypt and Jordan (which have signed peace treaties with Israel), Saudi Arabia and the UAE, among other Gulf states, now have extensive – albeit discreet – dealings with Israel. • This evolution has created a new situation in the region, with these Arab states now having considerable potential influence over the Israelis and Palestinians. It also has implications for US positions and policy. So far, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Jordan have chosen not to test what this influence could achieve. • One reason for the inactivity to date may be disenchantment with the Palestinians and their cause, including the inability of Palestinian leaders to unite to promote it. However, ignoring Palestinian concerns will not bring about a resolution of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which will continue to add to instability in the region. If Arab leaders see regional stability as being in their countries’ interests, they should be trying to shape any eventual peace plan advanced by the administration of US President Donald Trump in such a way that it forms a framework for negotiations that both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships can accept. Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking: The Role of the Arab States Introduction This briefing forms part of the Chatham House project, ‘Israel–Palestine: Beyond the Stalemate’.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and Their Impact on Israeli-Palestinian Peace Efforts
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Honors Theses Lee Honors College 4-25-2018 The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli-Palestinian Peace Efforts Daniel Bucksbaum Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/honors_theses Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Other Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Bucksbaum, Daniel, "The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli- Palestinian Peace Efforts" (2018). Honors Theses. 3009. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/honors_theses/3009 This Honors Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Lee Honors College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli- Palestinian Peace Efforts By Daniel Bucksbaum A thesis submitted to the Lee Honors College Western Michigan University April 2018 Thesis Committee: Jim Butterfield, Ph.D., Chair Yuan-Kang Wang, Ph.D. Mustafa Mughazy, Ph.D. Bucksbaum 1 Table of Contents I. Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 II. Source Material……………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 III. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 IV. Historical Context for the Two-State Solution………………………………………………………...6 a. Deeply Rooted and Ideological Claims to the Land……………………………………………….…..7 b. Legacy of the Oslo Accords……………………………………………………………………………………….9 c. Israeli Narrative: Why the Two-State Solution is Unfeasible……………………………………19 d. Palestinian Narrative: Why the Two-State Solution has become unattainable………..22 e. Drop in Support for the Two-State Solution; Negotiations entirely…………………………27 f.
    [Show full text]
  • Reimagining US Strategy in the Middle East
    REIMAGININGR I A I I G U.S.S STRATEGYT A E Y IIN THET E MMIDDLED L EEASTS Sustainable Partnerships, Strategic Investments Dalia Dassa Kaye, Linda Robinson, Jeffrey Martini, Nathan Vest, Ashley L. Rhoades C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA958-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0662-0 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. 2021 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover composite design: Jessica Arana Image: wael alreweie / Getty Images Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • An Israeli-Palestinian Confederation: a Viable Alternative for the “Two States Solution”?
    An Israeli-Palestinian Confederation: A viable alternative for the “two states solution”? Friedrich Naumann STIFTUNG FÜR DIE FREIHEIT HKS 92 (grau) CMYK 10, 0, 5, 65 HKS 44 (blau) CMYK 100, 50, 0, 0 An Israeli-Palestinian Confederation: A viable alternative for the “two states solution”? Table of Contents Introductory Note Yair Hirschfeld .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 An Israeli-Palestinian Confederation: A viable alternative for the “two states solution”? Eran Etzion ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Israel and Palestine: For and Against the Idea of a Confederation Yair Hirschfeld .............................................................................................................................................................. 20 About the writers ................................................................................................................................................. 31 The repeated failure of Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations during the last decades, regional unrest and destabilization throughout the Middle East have contributed to a diminished public belief and confidence in the viability of a peaceful Israel-Palestine two state solution. Through the encouragement and support of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Liberty, the S.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Report
    A LICENSE TO KILL Israeli Operations against "Wanted" and Masked Palestinians A Middle East Watch Report Human Rights Watch New York !!! Washington !!! Los Angeles !!! London Copyright 8 July 1993 by Human Rights Watch. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Library of Congress Card Catalog Number: 93-79007 ISBN: 1-56432-109-6 Middle East Watch Middle East Watch was founded in 1989 to establish and promote observance of internationally recognized human rights in the Middle East. The chair of Middle East Watch is Gary Sick and the vice chairs are Lisa Anderson and Bruce Rabb. Andrew Whitley is the executive director; Eric Goldstein is the research director; Virginia N. Sherry and Aziz Abu Hamad are associate directors; Suzanne Howard is the associate. HUMAHUMAHUMANHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH Human Rights Watch conducts regular, systematic investigations of human rights abuses in some sixty countries around the world. It addresses the human rights practices of governments of all political stripes, of all geopolitical alignments, and of all ethnic and religious persuasions. In internal wars it documents violations by both governments and rebel groups. Human Rights Watch defends freedom of thought and expression, due process of law and equal protection of the law; it documents and denounces murders, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, exile, censorship and other abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Human Rights Watch began in 1978 with the founding of Helsinki Watch by a group of publishers, lawyers and other activists and now maintains offices in New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, London, Moscow, Belgrade, Zagreb and Hong Kong.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gulf States and the Middle East Peace Process: Considerations, Stakes, and Options
    ISSUE BRIEF 08.25.20 The Gulf States and the Middle East Peace Process: Considerations, Stakes, and Options Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, Ph.D, Fellow for the Middle East conflict, the Gulf states complied with and INTRODUCTION enforced the Arab League boycott of Israel This issue brief examines where the six until at least 1994 and participated in the nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council— oil embargo of countries that supported 1 Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Israel in the Yom Kippur War of 1973. In Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates 1973, for example, the president of the (UAE)—currently stand in their outlook and UAE, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, approaches toward the Israeli-Palestinian claimed that “No Arab country is safe from issue. The first section of this brief begins by the perils of the battle with Zionism unless outlining how positions among the six Gulf it plays its role and bears its responsibilities, 2 states have evolved over the three decades in confronting the Israeli enemy.” In since the Madrid Conference of 1991. Section Kuwait, Sheikh Fahd al-Ahmad Al Sabah, a two analyzes the degree to which the six brother of two future Emirs, was wounded Gulf states’ relations with Israel are based while fighting with Fatah in Jordan in 3 on interests, values, or a combination of 1968, while in 1981 the Saudi government both, and how these differ from state to offered to finance the reconstruction of state. Section three details the Gulf states’ Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor after it was 4 responses to the peace plan unveiled by destroyed by an Israeli airstrike.
    [Show full text]