Our arguments prove correct; CFR interview
July 8th, 2003

Over the last several months on this list, we developed two central arguments:

1) The peace progress would only move forward when a new Palestinian leadership emerged genuinely committed to combatting terrorism, and who understood the disaster that is the Intifada. Individuals like Yasir Arafat were either incapable or unwilling to do so, we argued, and in either case, useless as a negotiating partner.

2) The fundamental reason Israel cannot immediately withdraw from the occupied territories is security: groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad are actively organizing to commit vicious acts of murder against civilians; having troops in the West Bank and Gaza is the only way to stop them terrorism before they act. For this reason, we claimed, Israel would not withdraw troops until it had received credible security guarantees from the Palestinians. That is, unless the Palestinians themselves took responsibility for arresting these terrorists, seizing their weapons, closing their factories, and policing the borders, Israel would remain there to protect its civilians.

Palestinian advocates on our campus and beyond failed to understand this basic element of the conflict, and missed the important developments. Their cart-before-the-horse logic — insisting on Israel withdrawal and only then would terrorism stop — proved wrong. They failed to see the struggle within the Palestinian leadership that began as early as last August between those who wanted to continue the Intifada and those who didn't, overlooked the sidelining of Arafat, and misconstrued the post-Iraq U.S. involvement.

The peace process has entered a "new chapter," as the following interview suggests, and it was by and large by following the course we advocated. How so? By ignoring Arafat as a useless partner for peace, the U.S. and Israel (and Arabs countries too, though quietly) strengthened the moderates, who had been locked in battle with the Arafat-era old guard, as well as rejectionists, terrorists, and extremists. The result is was a power transfer to the first Palestinian Prime Minister and officials who understand that it is in the Palestinian national interest to stop the terrorism.

In the last few days, we have seen this newly-armed and empowered Palestinian police (aided by Israel and trained by the CIA, using millions in US taxpayer dollars) patrolling their cities. In return, on June 29, the Israeli army began withdrawing from Gaza. On July 2, it withdrew from Bethlehem. If Palestinian policemen do their job, one city after another will be turned over into their hands, until one day, they'll find themselves policing a Palestinian state. And this is the only way it will happen. On July 5th, Palestinian police arrested four militants, another important development. On the pages of newspapers, there are pictures of Palestinian and Israeli policemen working side by side, and Israeli soldiers crying and hugging as they leave Palestinian cities.

The work is not over. Two hours ago, a suicide bomber killed a 65-year old woman. It is being attributed to a renegade cell opposed to the cease-fire and peace negotiations. This underscores the role the Palestinian Authority under Abbas has in stopping the attacks, and the need to not just have cease-fires, but to in the end dismantle the terror organizations.


See the interview with Judith Kipper, Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, July 2, 2003.