Daniel Kurtzer, whose long Mideast-focused diplomatic career included turns as U.S. ambassador to both Israel and Egypt, was in town Sunday to give the keynote speech at the annual meeting of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas.
I interviewed him before the event, then heard the speech, then (along with MinnPost teammate Don Shelby) conducted a post-speech Q-and-A with him in front of the audience of 500 or so. I was very impressed with Kurtzer’s deep, calm understanding of that region of current (and seemingly perpetual) crisis. I regret that a quick Monday morning blog post can’t capture the subtleties, but here are a few of his major insights.
On the Arab-Israeli conflict
The conflict is “resolvable.” Kurtzer didn’t imply that peace is imminent or that a deal will be easy to reach. But he is optimistic. The ingredients of the two-state solution have been on the table for years. The main thing needed for progress is “leaders on all sides who are ready to take manageable risks.”
As far as that goes, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is “about as good as it’s going to get” because he has unwaveringly, for years, renounced violence and favored negotiations, Kurtzer said.
Kurtzer didn’t say the same about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, although he noted that the biggest breakthrough to date on Arab-Israeli peace, the Camp David Accord of 1978, was signed by the hard-liner Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Kurtzer did, however, slam Netanyahu pretty hard over the contretemps that followed President Obama’s May speech on the Mideast. Netanyahu chose to overreact (Kurtzer called it “a crisis that didn’t have to happen”) to Obama’s formula that Israeli-Palestinian negotiations should be based on the 1967 boundaries with land swaps.
Netanyahu touched “the third rail of Israeli politics” by getting into a public spat with Obama over the formulation, including a disrespectful Oval Office meeting. “You don’t like to see your president talked to that way in his own office,” Kurtzer said.
Kurtzer, it should be noted, who has retired from the diplomatic service and now teaches at Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton, publicly supported Obama during the 2008 campaign and advised the president-elect during the transition. But he also criticized Obama’s Mideast policy for spending the first year and a half of the term arguing with the Israelis about settlement policy instead of finding ways to make progress on other peace issues.
During his prepared talk to the JCRC, Kurtzer offered the audience of mostly pro-Israel Americans an unexpected window onto the prospects for Arab-Israeli peace. In 2002, and again in 2007, the Arab League adopted a comprehensive peace proposal to settle the conflict.
In Kurtzer’s view, the Arab peace initiative:
1. Represented “a cosmic change in Arab policy,” from its former insistence that the solution was for Israel to cease to exist, to a willingness to normalize relations with Israel within its pre-1967 borders.
2. Was based on a pan-Arab conclusion that the problem of Israel was minor compared with the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran posed to the entire Arab state system.
The Arab peace proposal includes several provisions that would be considered deal-breakers on the Israeli side. Kurtzer said it would obviously have to be negotiated further. But if he is right about the “cosmic change” that it represents, it might mean that a peace deal could be struck not just between the Israelis and Palestinians, but between Israel and the Arab world in general.
On the ‘Arab Spring’
Kurtzer doesn’t pretend to know why this is all happening now, instead of 10 years ago or 10 years from now. He was recently in Egypt and said that even the organizers of the Tahrir Square movement were shocked that things moved so quickly to the Mubarak resignation.
(By the way, since Kurtzer, as U.S. ambassador, had constant contact with Mubarak, I asked him what it was like to be the deliverer of constantly ignored U.S. suggestions that he move the Egyptian dictatorship in a democratic direction. He said it wasn’t like Mubarak “would put his hands over his ears” when the message was delivered, but would calmly explain that he understood what it took to make Egypt work, and the American vision wasn’t it. )
Kurtzer said he could imagine genuine progress in a democratic direction in Egypt and Tunisia, the two countries in which the autocrats stepped down peacefully.
But in the four countries where the old regimes are fighting back — Yemen, Libya, Syria and Bahrain — he doesn’t hold out much hope for a good transition. If the dictator decides to fight back and if the military is willing to follow orders even when the orders require them to kill civilians, the odds favor survival of the dictators.
He specifically said that the moment may have passed for a possible Egypt-like outcome in Syria, because the military is sticking with the Assad regime and is clearly willing to shed civilian blood. In Libya, he said, the prospects are “exponentially” worse for a good outcome because during the Qaddafi decades, no basis, no precursor, no building blocks for a transition to democracy has been allowed to develop. Even if Qaddafi is forced out, Kurtzer said, Libya would face tribal warfare.
The third category of Arab states are the monarchies, Kurtzer said, which have considerably more legitimacy in their countries than the non-royal dictators. He noted the recent decision of the Gulf Cooperation Council to welcome Jordan and Morocco as new members. This turns the GCC into less of a club of countries that border the Persian Gulf and more of a club of Arab monarchies banding together to defend monarchism as an institution in the region.
More like this
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
35 comments
-
32 comments
-
23 comments
-
21 comments
-
20 comments
Comments (16)
The Arab Plan for Peace has been available to Israel for years but has not been accepted. Its greatest benefit to that country would be a guarantee that no Arab state would attack it (although I'm sure they would defend themselves if attacked by Israel).
This plan would require Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, which it no doubt does not want to do. Nor does it want to give up the Golan Heights or tear down the separation walls it has built in Jerusalem or make their illegal settlers leave the West Bank.
P.S. There is absolutely no proof, and never has been any, the Iran is developing a nuclear weapon OR that Iran intends to attack Israel with that or any other armaments for any reason, although its president sometimes speaks disrespectfully of Israel. The nuclear "threat" is a fiction being used to create fear of Iran -- just as the nonexistent WMD created fear of Iraq and was used as a "reason" to attack iran. (It was more acceptable than admitting we wanted its oil.)
It was difficult attending the JCRC event this last Saturday. Here was a room full of left wing Jews lapping up every bit of Kurtzer's failed policies and ideas.
I cannot begin to fathom the passivity and laissez faire attitudes of the elites in the Jewish community. Dutifully, like borg they gave an ovation for this pro- Palestinian ambassador.
It seems Jews have a very short memory.
If only Israel would give up a bit more of it's land, if only they would just forget about Hamas and make peace with Abbas and those lovers of Israel/Jews he represents....Just divide up the holy city-then Israel for sure would have peace.
As long as I am making my point-Ms. Vetch is certainly right. Why should Israel concern herself with a nation who has repeatedly lied to the United Nations about her WMD production, and has publicaly stated that she wants Israel eradicated from the map? No-that is just sound judgement on her part.
Oh please Richard. Spare us the Hamas and holy city spiel. Why don't u admit right wing AIPAC drones have no interest in any real peace. Their only job is to move the goal post each time. After all keeping Palestinians in their cattle pens is A-OK as long as any discussion of their rights is drowned out by the usual propaganda.
About Iran and nuclear weapons. Please. When did Israel come clean about its nuclear weapons. Why don't you admit it Iran is just another latest excuse to move the goal post further.
Keep moving the goal post all u want. Its not like the Palestinians are going to suddenly forget about their homelands.
The next country to have Iran as its silent ally is going to be Egypt and then in a decade or two it will be Saudi. Good luck after that.
No, the Jews will not leave the strategic Golans Heights, Israel will not allow itself to be overrun by Arabs seeking its destruction, Judea and Samaria is now once again Jewish territory and will not be given up, and all of Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
Next.
The problem is that BOTH the Palestinians and the Israelis have valid claims to Palestine as their homeland.
Since there are ten times as many Arabs as Jews (and despite the efforts of the Orthodox the Palestinians are outbreeding the Israelis), eventually the Israeli military superiority will wane, and without direct external (American, Western European) support, Israel will not survive as an independent nation.
Neal K: Every time Israel violates the sovereignty of a neighbor by stealing land or water or attacking it militarily, it loses more of the welcoming support that the Arab nations offered it when European Jews fled from the horrors in Germany and other Nazi-held states to Palestine.
The Arabs and Iranians do NOT want Israel to disappear, but they do want it to respect their rights as equal to its own.
As long as Israel refuses to do this, resistance fighters in Palestine (Hamas) and Lebanon (Hezbollah) will fight back.
Bernice clearly has a grasp on the situation in the Mideast, especially regarding Israel's safety when it comes to enemies who wish to destroy her.
For instance, when she states:
"The Arabs and Iranians do NOT want Israel to disappear, but they do want it to respect their rights as equal to its own."
Bernice, here are just a few kinks to edify your lack of acumen on the subject..
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122553
http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm
http://queenofswords.wordpress.com/2007/03/08/ahmadinejads-threats-to-de...
Israel will never allow herself to be destroyed by its Islamic/tyrannical neighbors. Nor will she capitulate to dividing the Holy city. It matters not if you agree or disagree with me.
Perhaps some of you are rooting for the Sampson option.
Richard--
All Israeli's are not right wing jingoists.
There are other sources, such as
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-false-messiah-in-the-pr...
Paul, of course all Israeli's are not right wing jingoists....just as all Jews in America are not self loathing, left-wing haters of the state of Israel.
Just because this blog leans highly left, and is hateful toward Israel-doesn't mean that there are not a few readers here who believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, and protect herself against the threats of her enemies.
My thesis is plain. Why should any civilized nation negotiate with other entities who clearly have in their charters the destruction of that state?
Arabs and Muslim countries cannot sustain a treaty with a democracy without either a strongman enforcing it-or a dependency on Israel for defensive protection. I also maintain that without flexing it's muscle regularly, Israel would be destroyed.
Hey. We can agree to disagree. Unfortunately, Israel can only afford to make one mistake. I'm not sure that bothers you Paul.
"right to exist" is the catch all phrase to justify screwing the Palestinians off their land.
"destruction of that state" hey Richard, when are u going to talk about the destruction of Palestine. Oh wait that would run counter to your AIPAC propaganda
"can only afford to make one mistake" oh sniff, sniff, with 100+ nukes and the promise of protection from every western democracy, isn't this AIPAC slogan getting a little marmy ?
Raj, you are a beautiful man, just truly misguided.
It seems we are just destined to disagree on the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. I now realize that the "right of existence" in your way of thinking means the destruction of Israel. I can understand that you are cloudy from all of the Muslim Brotherhood and Move On propaganda...and I forgive you for it.
Raj, just like any other nation with the means to defend herself, Israel has exercised her rights of self defense. I believe if Israel is put in mortal danger, there will be vaporization and carnage on a momentous scale. For some reason, I think that is what you are actually rooting for.
Love the give and take you little stinker! :)
Paul Brandon wrote: "All Israeli's are not right wing jingoists."
Right wing with who as a reference? The Salafists? The Deobands? The Arab Islamists? The Ikhwan?
Bernice Vetch wrote: "As long as Israel refuses to do this, resistance fighters in Palestine (Hamas) and Lebanon (Hezbollah) will fight back."
The prog-left are the new anti-Semites. They have found common cause with neo-Nazi jihadists.
Bernice Vetch:
*plonk*
Raj Maddali wrote: ""right to exist" is the catch all phrase to justify screwing the Palestinians off their land."
The Muslims slaughtered, subjugated and expelled the Jews from Arabia. Even trade.
You never did answer my question posted elsewhere on Minnpost: *are* you a Deoband?
Neal--
Are you referring to Israeli political parties?
The only solution for a lasting peace is absolute democratic process (that we Americans cherish so passionately) for the entire territory in question, otherwise, the peace will not last. All people who lived there without regard to religion, race, etc. should vote on how they would like their one country to be run. I favor one state solution because two states would only attempt to “legalize” Zionist occupation that will be remembered in history until it is corrected by future large scale conflicts, so no lasting peace will result. The only issue with the fair democratic process is what to do with all manipulated Jewish people who the Zionist regime imported for decades to increase the Jewish population from around 100,000 to over 5 Million since the start of the occupation. This is obviously an attempt to unjustly manipulate any future democratic process by forcefully increasing the occupier’s population at the expense of others. Any compromise other than the absolute fair democratic process with no manipulated population will be temporary with terrible conflicts looming to correct it in the future.
The truth is that the Zionist regime will not accept any democratic process even if the manipulated Jewish population is included because it cannot exist as a democratic country as Zionists will be outvoted by all others who live there (Zionists were in an infinite minority before the occupation). The Zionist regime can only temporarily exist through the force of its arms as a one people country where only select ones can vote and where different laws apply to different people.
The world must stand up against the Zionist regime by cutting all diplomatic and economic relations with it. Many countries have already stopped all relations with the Zionist regime and others are in the process of doing the same. We Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime through urging our state representatives and senators to do what the rest of the world is doing.
If it is ever reached, the current and any other artificial “peace agreement” will be illegitimate before it is ever signed because (1) all people living in Palestine regardless of religion, race, origin, etc. (hereinafter “All People of Palestine”) were never given a choice on how they want their land to be governed, and (2) all contracts signed under duress are null and void.
The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed. That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies). Imagine if Russians would simply occupy a town in the U.S. where they are in significant numbers and attempt to create a Russian state there without giving the rest of the Americans living there a choice. Imagine then if they would try to institute a “peace agreement” that would attempt to legitimize their occupation. The “peace agreement” would logically and legally be illegitimate because the Americans were not given a choice.
Under all countries’ laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine “peace agreement” process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy “an offer he could not refuse” by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss’ offer, any “peace agreement” other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void.
The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this “peace agreement” attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other “peace agreement” that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people’s survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this “peace agreement” by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.
The main Zionist claim is that they have a supreme right to some of Palestinian territory because they lived there thousands of years ago. Let’s examine the core and real nature of this claim.
Firstly, this claim is mistaken and selfish in its core concept because Zionists fail to recognize that history is a continuum and that there were other people living in majority in Palestine before the Jews and also after the Jews. Zionists simply cut history at a convenient point for them and claim ancestral ties to the land as of that convenient point.
Secondly, whatever the claim, it is beyond absurd to try to shape modern world based on thousands of years old maps. Imagine if the rest of the world would be reshaped by who was on the land thousands of years ago. It would cause horrific wars, countless refugees, and unimaginable human suffering, exactly what is happening in Palestine.
Thirdly and most disturbing, Zionist goal was to establish a Jewish state wherever possible. Palestine may have been a preference, but Palestine was not the only location that Zionists planned as their state in modern times. Another location was Argentina where Jews have been migrating for hundreds of years for the purpose of establishing a state. Also, locations in Europe were on the list and that’s why the Catholic Church was killing/expelling Jews since Roman times (read the history of the Holly Inquisition). Whatever the location, Zionist plan was to simply occupy the people living on the land even if that would mean imposing a regime worst than Nazi Germany’s from which they escaped. And Zionists would just use a different ideological coloring than the one used in Palestine in the attempt to rationalize the occupation.
In conclusion, the main claim on which the Zionist regime is built in Palestine is erroneous, selfish, and a lie. I am categorically against generalizing, and recognize that many Jews are against the crimes the Zionist regime is committing and that many Jews are leading the global resistance to it. They should be proud.