When (then-)Crown Prince Abdullah wished to repair the image of Saudi Arabia – 15 of whose nationals had been involved in the worst terrorist act on American soil – in American eyes, he invited Thomas Friedman to Riyadh (Friedman, a Jew, could not go to Mecca) and offered “a peace plan.” Friedman wrote:
Earlier this month, I wrote a column suggesting that the 22 members of the Arab League, at their summit in Beirut on March 27 and 28, make a simple, clear-cut proposal to Israel to break the Israeli-Palestinian impasse: In return for a total withdrawal by Israel to the June 4, 1967, lines, and the establishment of a Palestinian state, the 22 members of the Arab League would offer Israel full diplomatic relations, normalized trade and security guarantees. Full withdrawal, in accord with U.N. Resolution 242, for full peace between Israel and the entire Arab world. Why not?
I am currently in Saudi Arabia on a visit — part of the Saudi opening to try to explain themselves better to the world in light of the fact that 15 Saudis were involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. So I took the opportunity of a dinner with Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, and de facto ruler, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, to try out the idea of this Arab League proposal. I knew that Jordan, Morocco and some key Arab League officials had been talking about this idea in private but had not dared to broach it publicly until one of the ”big boys” — Saudi Arabia or Egypt — took the lead.
Abdullah responded with “you took the words right of my desk,” and the Saudi peace plan ultimatum was born.
And so in March, 2002, in Syrian occupied Beirut, Abdullah said:
The peace process is based on a clear principle: land for peace. This principle is accepted by the international community as a whole, and is embodied in United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and was adopted by the Madrid Conference in 1991. It was confirmed by the resolutions of the European Community and other regional organizations, and re-emphasized once more this month by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397.
My esteemed brethren, it is clear in our minds, and in the minds of our brethren in Palestine, Syria and Lebanon, that the only acceptable objective of the peace process is the full Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied Arab territories, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Al Quds Al Sharif (East Jerusalem) as its capital, and the return of refugees.
So in order to mend fences with the United States, Abdullah called on Israel to end the occupation in exchange for nebulous promises of normalization.
Last week in his landmark address to the Arab World, President Obama said:
On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people — Muslims and Christians — have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they’ve endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations — large and small — that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own. (Applause.)
And in order to repair America’s image in the Arab world, he, too argues that Israel must end the occupation. To be fair, the President was a little more specific about Arab responsibilities towards Israel than Abdullah was, but not by much.
In the end to both Abdullah and President Obama, it seems, the way to improve the Arab image in American eyes and the American image in Arab eyes is to put pressure on Israel. But the Arab or Muslim conflict with the West did not start or end with 9/11. And while the President feels that he was very clear that there are obligations on both sides despite the media’s emphasis, I believe it’s reasonable clear (see where the applause lines are in the speech) that his audience – across the Arab and Muslim worlds – only heard “settlements” and “occupation.” The calls for tolerance and reform, I believe, went largely unheeded.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
