Steps versus Solutions in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Abstract

Partial solutions can present way stations en route to complete resolution of regional conflicts, or they can actually hinder those resolutions by providing comfortable resting places with no incentives to move on. The step-by-step peace process in the Middle East took account of local and global realities, but it left the conflict stuck in its progress after the Camp David Accords and the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty. Saddam Hussein erred in seeing in the end of the Cold War an opportunity to carry out aggression with impunity, but there will be other Saddam Husseins as long as a general settlement is not produced in the region. What is needed is joint U.S.-Soviet action and a balanced formula that provides for the return of a few Palestinians to Israel in exchange for the maintenance of some Israeli settlements on the West Bank, sealed by an international conference.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. L. Miller , ed., Dynamics of World Politics: Studies on the Resolution of Conflict (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1968), p. 5.

2. Foreign Affairs, 62(5):1195 (Summer 1984).

3. T. R. Gurr , ed., Handbook of Political Conflict: Theory and Research (New York: Free Press, 1980), p. 453.

4. N. Chazan , “Domestic Developments in Israel,” in The Middle East: Ten Years after Camp David, ed. W. B. Quandt (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1988), pp. 155-156.

5. William B. Quandt , Camp David: Peacemaking and Politics (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1986), p. 333.

6. Foreign Policy, Spring 1990, no. 78, p. 103.

7. H. Saunders , “Reconstituting the Arab-Israeli Peace Process,” in Middle East, ed. Quandt , p. 415.