|
|
| Home | |
| Students | |
| 2008 Presidential election | |
| Arts | |
| Education | |
| Entertainment | |
| Environment | |
| Fashion | |
| Health | |
| Medicine | |
| Sports | |
| Terrorism | |
| Travel | |
| War in Iraq | |
| Click here for Archives |
TENTATIVE PEACE AGREEMENT REACHED BETWEEN PALESTINE AND ISRAEL
By Julie Brown
POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y., Dec. 3 – Israel and Palestine agreed to a deadline for peace by the end of 2008 last Tuesday after nearly 60 years of deadly conflict.
The agreement comes near the end of the Bush Administration, which has done little to help ease the constant violence that has long plagued the Middle East. According to The Washington Post, the conference held at the U.S Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland last week was the first U.S. effort to involve various countries from the Middle East in peace talks since the end of the Clinton Administration.
“I believe now is precisely the right time to begin these negotiations,” President Bush was quoted as saying in The New York Times. “America will do everything in our power to support their quest for peace, but we cannot achieve it for them.”
Whether or not the peace agreement will succeed is a matter that depends on how aggressive the U.S. decides to be in influencing Palestinians and Israelis. According to The New York Times, there are several issues that stand in the way of peace between the two warring countries, including the status of Jerusalem (which both countries claim as their own) and the borders of a Palestinian state. Other issues include Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the matter of Palestinian refugees who were forced to leave Israel.
“The fact that these two countries were willing to sit down and discuss peace is a step in the right direction,” said Alyssa Brissette, a junior at Marist College. “Whether or not the agreement will stand is another matter.”
The conference comes as the American image continues to drop sharply in the Middle East. Representatives from Iraq, Kuwait and Libya were invited to attend, but delegates were not sent. According to The Washington Post, representatives from Hamas (the Palestinian militant group in charge of the Gaza Strip) were not invited to the conference, with members of the group condemning it as a waste of time.
“We want peace,” Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was quoted as saying in The Washington Post. “We demand an end to terror, and an end to incitement and to hatred. We are prepared to make a painful compromise, rife with risks, in order to realize these aspirations.”
Despite hopeful speeches for peace from both Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, many obstacles remain in the way of the lofty goal, including Hamas. The Washington Post has reported that thousands of Hamas supporters gathered in the Gaza Strip to protest the peace talks in Annapolis, while vowing to increase attacks on Israeli citizens. The previous day, thousands of Israelis marched from the Western Wall to Olmert’s residence to protest the creation of a Palestinian State.
“These groups don’t want peace because they are filled with generations of hatred,” said Jillian McPhail, a junior at Marist College. “I just don’t think this new peace agreement is an accurate portrayal of what these countries really want.”
Many delegates were concerned that the Bush Administration would focus attention on terrorism rather than peace throughout the Middle East. According to The New York Times, many of the Sunni Arab delegates in attendance were relieved to see that the U.S. had re-engaged in the battle for Muslim hearts and minds, as the growing tension between Iran and other countries in the region has increased need for strategic alliances.
“The Arabs have come here not because they love the Jews or even the Palestinians,” a member of a Palestinian negotiating team told The New York Times. “They came here because they need a strategic alliance with the United States against Iran.”
Iran’s nuclear program and strong allies in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq have many Arab nations worried. These Arab nations are concerned that their youth are being lost to religious militancy, according to The New York Times. The countries that surround the Persian Gulf are worried about losing their economic power and regional stability, while remaining fearful of their vulnerability to terrorism because of the Israeli conflict.
“For the Arab centrists, the new Middle East is a nasty one, and the Palestinian issue resonates emotionally and deeply,” a former negotiator from the Clinton Administration told the New York Times.