Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, October/November
1998, pages 83-85
Middle East History—It Happened in November
Sadats Jerusalem Trip Begins Difficult
Path of Egyptian-Israeli Peace
By Donald Neff
On Nov. 19, 1977, Anwar Sadat made his historic visit
to Jerusalem and declared the next day before Israels parliament:
We really and truly welcome you to live among us in peace
and security.1
It was a spectacular moment, a personal commitment of
the Egyptian leaders desire for peace. However, deep suspicions
remained in Israel even on the day of his arrival. Atop a roof at
Ben-Gurion International Airport where Sadat landed were Israeli
sharpshooters. Absurd as it seems in retrospect, they were there
in part in fear that the Egyptian airplane was not carrying Sadat
at all but a planeload of terrorists.2 Despite such exaggerated
suspicions, the visit led within a year and a half to the first
peace treaty between Israel and an Arab country, mainly because
of American largess.
It was not an easy journey. In public, Sadat expressed
optimism that his sacred mission had essentially solved
the Arab-Israeli conflict. But privately he was deeply disappointed
by his realization that he had not managed to solve the conflict
with one grand gesture. Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin showed
no willingness to match Sadats imaginative gesture or even
to make any serious concessions, and the Palestinians and other
Arab states roundly condemned him for going to Jerusalem.3
All factions of the Palestine Liberation Organization joined in
calling his visit to Jerusalem treasonous.4
Instead of gaining the instant freedom of the Palestinians
and Egypts land occupied by Israel, as he had hoped, Sadat
found himself in the following months increasingly isolated. On
Dec. 5, 1977, Algeria, Iraq, Libya, Syria and South Yemen jointly
condemned the visit and vowed to work for the frustration
of the results of President Sadats visit to the Zionist entity.5
The nations said they were freezing political and diplomatic relations
with Egypt and would refuse to attend meetings of the Arab League
held in Egypt. Sadats angry reaction was to sever diplomatic
ties with all of them.6
Less than a week later, on Dec. 14, Sadat suffered another
major embarrassment when he called for a conference in Cairo to
unify the Arab position and receive international support for his
efforts. The Arab nations refused to attend, as did the Soviet Union.7
Only Israel, the United States and the United Nations attended.
No agreements emerged from the conference, adding to Sadats
humiliation.8
Sadats disillusionment was obvious when he hosted
a reciprocal visit to Egypt for the Israelis on Dec. 25, 1977. Gone
was the magic and drama of his visit to Jerusalem.9 Instead
of personally meeting Begin and his group, Sadat sent his vice president
to greet them. There were no bands, no Israeli flags, no placards
of greeting for the Israeli delegation. Even Defense Minister Ezer
Weizman, who had established the warmest relations of any of the
Israelis with Sadat the previous month, found the reception frosty.
Given Begins well-known love of pomp and ceremony and his
excessive concern with dignity, Weizman concluded: The chilly
welcome, the indifference toward Begin, the flouting of the most
elementary rules of protocol and courtesy—all these could only be
harmful to our talks.10
Sadat met the Israeli delegation not in Cairo but at
Ismailiya on the western bank of the Suez Canal. He and Begin immediately
retired for brief private talks. Sadat accepted a Begin proposal
to form two separate committees to discuss military and political
issues. The Egyptian leader made a considerable concession in agreeing
that the political committee would meet in Jerusalem, implying to
the Israelis some measure of recognition that Jerusalem was
Israels capital.11
The concession was typical of Sadat—a grand gesture,
an open show of conciliation, and underneath an impatience with
details, a concentration on general principles, and most of all,
a hard determination to regain every inch of Egypts land.
Unhappily, no two negotiators could have been less suited to deal
with each other.
Unlike Sadat, Begin delighted in the parsing of sentences,
the splitting of words, the elaboration of nuances. He was a subtle
and wily negotiator enamored with the rhetorical flourish but trustful
only of the technicalities of negotiation. He was as wedded to the
concept of Israeli retention of Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel,
meaning Jewish control over Samaria and Judea, the West Bank, as
Sadat was to getting back Egyptian land. As Ezer Weizman noted:
Anyone observing the two men could not have overlooked
the profound divergence in their attitudes. Both desired peace.
But whereas Sadat wanted to take it by storm, capitalizing on the
momentum from his visit to Jerusalem to reach his final objective,
Begin preferred to creep forward inch by inch. He took the dream
of peace and ground it down into the fine, dry powder of details,
legal clauses, and quotes from international law.12
The talks dragged on into the next day. But there was
no progress. Begin refused to consent to the issuance of general
principles on withdrawal and self-determination for the Palestinians,
and Sadat refused to accept the idea of Israel retaining Jewish
settlements in Sinai. The two-day meeting ended in stalemate and
a further worsening of the atmosphere that had seemed so promising
only the month before.13
The major problem was not the return of Egypts
Sinai Peninsula, which had little significance for Begin, but retention
of the West Bank with its Jewish settlements. Sadat had vowed that
he would not only regain the Sinai but also gain self-determination
for the Palestinians. As he said publicly shortly before going to
Jerusalem: The Palestinian problem was the core and crux
of the Arab-Israeli conflict and that no progress could
be achieved without its solution.14
President Jimmy Carter shared these views. He was the
first president to declare publicly that settlements in the occupied
territories were illegal.15 In order to help Sadat, and
goad Begin to be more forthcoming, Carter visited Egypt on Jan.
4, 1978. He enunciated what later became known as the Aswan Declaration,
a formula that seemed to grant the Palestinians self-determination.
Carter said that any solution must enable Palestinians to
participate in the determination of their own future.16
On that same day, Israel revealed it was establishing
four new settlements in the Sinai. Carter and Sadat were both furious,
suspecting that Begin was purposefully fouling the peace process.17
Things degenerated. On Jan. 18, 1978, the first—and
last—meeting of the joint Egyptian-Israeli Political Committee ended
in mutual recrimination. The foreign ministers of Egypt and Israel
could not get past the first item on the agenda, a declaration of
intentions.18 Sadat ordered home his delegation the next
day, saying Israel wanted land more than peace.19
Carter met in Washington with Sadat for four days starting
Feb. 4 to work out a joint strategy to press Israel to make concessions.20
Carter by then had little real trust or confidence in
Begin, according to the National Security Councils Middle
East expert, William Quandt.21 At the end of their talks,
Carter and Sadat agreed that Egypt would put forth in writing its
proposals for the future of the Palestinians. It was assumed that
Israel would reject the proposals and that the United States would
then put forward its plan for a West Bank settlement.22
But there was a problem that foiled the plan. Israels
supporters adamantly opposed U.S. pressure against the Jewish state.
Their hand was strengthened by the coincidence that controversial
treaties on Panama, on which Carter had worked so hard, were about
to come before the Senate. Carter still did not have enough votes,
and several of the senators whose votes the president needed were
strong supporters of Israel. Thus, the domestic dimension of the
Arab-Israeli conflict once again influenced the White Houses
actions. In this case it meant the president did not believe he
had the political power to apply the necessary pressure on Israel
to make it bow to U.S. policy.23
So it went month after month. The momentum of Sadats
bold gesture drained away and relations between Egypt and Israel
returned to mutual animosity. The final straw came on July 23, 1978,
when Begin, in reply to a plea from Sadat that Israel make some
modest goodwill gesture in support of the peace process, rudely
turned down the Egyptian leader. Replied Begin: Not even one
grain of desert sand. Nobody can get anything for nothing.24
Sadats Final Word
On July 30, a flash cable from Ambassador Hermann Eilts
in Cairo informed Carter that Sadat told him in great agitation
that he was at the end of his patience. The Egyptian leader demanded
that the United States press Israel to abide by the basic principles
of U.S. policy: withdrawal, sovereignty for the Palestinians and
the illegality of settlements. Sadat said this was his final word.25
On that same day, Carter, desperate for some achievement,
decided he would invite both Sadat and Begin to a summit meeting
at Camp David.26 It was in this mood of despair that
the celebrated Camp David meeting among Begin, Carter and Sadat
took place between Sept. 5 to Sept. 17. In the end, it resulted
in just what Sadats critics suspected—a bilateral deal between
Egypt and Israel with only empty words about the Palestinians.
Under the framework dealing with the West Bank and Gaza
(the Golan Heights was not mentioned), full autonomy
was promised the Palestinians after a transitional period not
exceeding five years. The transitional period was to begin
with the election by the Palestinians of a self-governing
authority (administrative council), at which time the
Israeli military government and its civilian administration will
be withdrawn and the self-governing authority would establish
a strong local police force.
Then, as soon as possible, but not later than
the third year after the beginning of the transitional period,
negotiations would begin to determine the final status of
the West Bank and Gaza...and to conclude a peace treaty between
Israel and Jordan by the end of the transitional period.27
Arab reaction was harshly negative, especially among
Palestinians. As usual, they had not been allowed to participate
in negotiations that presumed to represent their fate.
Their criticisms pointed out that there was no elaboration
of what Begin meant by full autonomy; there was no detailed
plan on just how the administrative council was to be elected or
which Palestinians would be eligible to serve on it. Nor was there
any mention of the principles that Sadat had sought such as self-determination
or the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by
war. In addition, there was no challenge to Israels
claim of sovereignty over Jerusalem, nor had Begin committed Israel
to anything more than a temporary freeze on settlements, an implicit
acceptance of his contention that they were legal. Finally, the
PLO, the body designated by the Arab world to represent the Palestinians,
was not mentioned.28
In the end, none of this mattered. Begin had no intention
of honoring the parts of the agreement dealing with the West Bank
and Palestinians, as he quickly made clear. Almost immediately after
signing the accords, the Israeli leader began to reinterpret them
in such a narrow way that they lost all meaning in their application
to the Palestinians and the West Bank.29
Although the accords said that the question of sovereignty
of the West Bank and Gaza would be negotiated after five years,
Begin went before Congress two days after the accords had been signed
and declared: I believe with all my heart that the Jewish
people have a right to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria.30
The following day, Begin told Jewish American leaders
in New York: I hereby declare the Israel Defense Forces will
stay in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip to defend our people and
make sure Jewish blood is not shed again. I hereby declare they
will stay beyond five years.31
As for the phrase legitimate rights of the Palestinians,
which was used in the agreements as an acknowledgement of Palestinian
interests, Begin declared that it has no meaning. He
had accepted the phrase only to please Carter and Sadat and
because it does not change reality.32
In reality, no serious effort was made by Begin in the
five additional years he remained as Israels leader, and none
during the seven years his Likud successor, Yitzhak Shamir, was
in power. Instead, the practical result of the accords was to neutralize
Egypt, the Jewish states most powerful Arab neighbor. As anticipated
by Sadats critics, this freed Israel to pursue aggressive
policies such as the annexation of Jerusalem in 1980, the bombing
of Iraqs nuclear facility in 1981 and the invasion of Lebanon
in 1982.
At the same time, Begin enormously expanded Jewish settlements
in the territories occupied in 1967, which was his main priority.
When he came to power in 1977, there were about 50,000 Jews living
in Arab East Jerusalem and about 7,000 in 45 settlements in the
West Bank and in an additional 45 in the rest of the occupied territories.
When he left office six years later, there were close to 200 settlements
in all the occupied territories, with about 100,000 Jewish settlers
in East Jerusalem and 22,000 Jewish settlers in the territories.33
The positioning of the settlements essentially established
the central points for Jewish settlement throughout the territories.
His Likud successor, Yitzhak Shamir, then pursued an aggressive
program that substantially thickened and expanded these focal points.34
When Shamir left office in mid-1992, there were about 245,000 Jews
in some 250 settlements, including East Jerusalem.35
The NSCs William Quandt, who attended the Camp
David meetings, concluded: Begin was no doubt the most able
negotiator at Camp David.36
Camp David was a triumph for Israel and Begins
settlements policy, and it was accordingly widely hailed by the
U.S. media and in Congress. But for Carter and Sadat it was a disaster
waiting to happen. Despite all the hype, the fact was that Israel
showed no more willingness to make concessions after Camp David
than before. Talks between Egypt and Israel to implement the accords
quickly broke down and the Middle East returned to gridlock. Carter
and Sadat had spent a huge amount of time in search of peace but
by the beginning of 1979 it was as elusive as ever.
In desperation, President Carter himself flew off to
the Middle East in March 1979. He spent a week shuttling between
Egypt and Israel before finally gaining a peace agreement between
the two countries.
It did not come cheaply. The treaty not only cost the
president his time but the American taxpayer unprecedented amounts
of money. The United States promised Israel in a far-reaching Memorandum
of Understanding a variety of major transfers of technology and
aid, including $3 billion to relocate two Israeli air bases out
of the Sinai, where they had no right to be in the first place.37
Egypt also profited. It was given $1.5 billion in military aid over
three years.38
Following the treaty, which was signed in Washington
on March 26, 1979, U.S. aid climbed until 1985, when it reached
$3 billion annually for Israel and $2.1 billion for Egypt, all of
it in nonrepayable grants. These levels remained the same in 1998,
giving Egypt and Israel the distinction of being the two largest
recipients of U.S. aid in the world.
The treaty did nothing to help Carters political
fortunes. He went down to defeat the next year at the hands of Ronald
Reagan, a strong supporter of Israel who immediately declared as
president that Israeli settlements were not illegal. Anwar Sadat
paid for his efforts with his life. He was gunned down by Muslim
fundamentalists on Oct. 6, 1981, while celebrating the eighth anniversary
of his war against Israel. Begin remained in power until Sept. 15,
1983, when he voluntarily resigned, successful in his lifes
aim to establish the master plan for Jewish settlements in Palestine.
X
RECOMMENDED READING:
Boudreault, Jody, and Yasser Salaam, U.S. Official
Statements: Status of Jerusalem, Washington, DC, Institute for
Palestine Studies, 1992.
Boutros-Ghali, Boutros, Egypts Road to Jerusalem:
A Diplomats Story of the Struggle for Peace in the Middle
East, New York, Random House, 1997.
Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Power and Principle: Memoirs
of the National Security Adviser, New York, Farrar, Strauss,
Giroux, 1983.
Dayan, Moshe, Breakthrough, New York, Alfred
A. Knopf, 1981.
Fahmy, Ismail, Negotiating for Peace in the Middle
East, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983.
*Khouri, Fred J., The Arab-Israeli Dilemma (3rd
ed.), Syracuse, NY, Syracuse University Press, 1985.
Kimche, Jon, There Could Have Been Peace , New
York, Dial Press, 1973.
Medzini, Meron, Israels Foreign Relations:
Selected Documents, 1977-1979 (vols. 4 and 5), Jerusalem, Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, 1981.
OBrien, Conor Cruise, The Siege: The Saga
of Israel and Zionism, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1986.
Quandt, William B., Camp David: Peacemaking and Politics,
Washington, DC, The Brookings Institution, 1986.
Riad, Mahmoud, The Struggle for Peace in the Middle
East, New York, Quartet Books, 1981.
Rubenberg, Cheryl A., Israel and the American National
Interest: A Critical Examination , Chicago, University of Illinois
Press, 1986.
Sadat, Anwar, In Search of Identity, New York,
Harper & Row, 1978.
Safty, Adel, From Camp David to the Gulf: Negotiations,
Language & Propaganda, and War, New York, Black Rose Books,
1992.
Sicherman, Harvey, Palestinian Self-Government (Autonomy):
Its Past and Its Future, Washington, DC, The Washington Institute
for Near East Policy, 1991.
Silver, Eric, Begin: The Haunted Prophet, New
York, Random House, 1984.
Tillman, Seth, The United States in the Middle East:
Interests and Obstacles, Bloomington, Indiana University Press,
1982.
U.S. Department of State, American Foreign Policy:
Basic Documents, 1977-1980, Washington, DC, U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1983.
Weizman, Ezer, The Battle for Peace , New York,
Bantam Books, 1981.
*Available through the AET
Book Club.
NOTES:
1 The text is in New York Times, 11/21/77, and
Quandt, Camp David, Appendix C. Also see Sadat, In Search
of Identity, p. 309; Brzezinski, Power and Principle,
p. 111; Fahmy, Negotiating for Peace in the Middle East,
p. 277; Rubenberg, Israel and the American National Interest,
p. 217.
2 Quandt, Camp David, p. 147.
3 Safty, From Camp David to the Gulf , p. 68.
4 The text is in State Department, American Foreign
Policy 1977-1980, p. 635.
5 Text in State Department, American Foreign
Policy 1977-1980, pp. 636-38.
6 Riad, The Struggle for Peace in the Middle
East, p. 308.
7 OBrien, The Siege, p. 580; Safty, From Camp
David to the Gulf, pp. 71, 72.
8 Dayan, Breakthrough, p. 99.
9 Quandt, Camp David, p. 159; Safty, From
Camp David to the Gulf, pp. 69-70; Sicherman, Palestinian
Self-Government (Autonomy), pp. 11-12. Also see Dayan, Breakthrough,
pp. 102-05; Weizman, The Battle for Peace, pp. 122-35.
10 Weizman, The Battle for Peace, pp. 123-24.
11 Ibid., p. 126.
12 Ibid., pp. 136-37.
13 The text of their joint news conference is in New
York Times, 12/27/77.
14 New York Times, 4/5/77.
15 The text is in New York Times, 7/29/77. Previous
administrations had taken this position through statements by various
spokesmen but Carter was the first president to say it in public.
See Boudreault and Salaam. U.S. Official Statements: Status of
Jerusalem.
16 The text of Carters and Sadats statements
are in New York Times, 1/5/78, and Medzini, M. Israels
Foreign Relations, Selected Documents, 1977-79, pp. 289-90.
Also see Brzezinski, Power and Principle, p. 239; Quandt,
Camp David, p. 161; Sicherman, Palestinian Self-Government
(Autonomy), pp. 12-13; Tillman, The United States in the
Middle East, pp. 220-21. Tillman observes that Carter never
embraced the idea of an independent Palestinian state and that the
declaration actually put the Palestinians on notice that while they
might participate in deciding their own future, Israel
and perhaps others would participate as well, guaranteeing that
there would be no independent Palestinian state. See Brzezinski,
Power and Principle, pp. 234-39, for background on U.S. attitudes
toward the Middle East at the start of the year; compare with Quandt,
Camp David , p. 168.
17 Quandt, Camp David, p. 161; Safty, From
Camp David to the Gulf, pp. 70-71.
18 Dayan, Breakthrough, p. 112; Safty, From
Camp David to the Gulf, pp. 71-72.
19 Quandt, Camp David, p. 165.
20 Brzezinski, Power and Principle, pp. 243-44;
Quandt, Camp David, p. 175; Safty, From Camp David to
the Gulf, p. 73. Kimche, The Last Option , pp. 95-110,
has a particularly sensational account of this joint effort.
21 Quandt, Camp David, p. 167.
22 Ibid., p. 175. Also see Rubenberg, Israel
and the American National Interest, pp. 221-23. The text of
the joint Carter-Sadat public statement is in New York Times,
2/9/78.
23 Quandt, Camp David, p. 174.
24 Rubenberg, Israel and the American National Interest,
p. 231.
25 Quandt, Camp David, pp. 201-02.
26 Ibid., p. 202; Brzezinski, Power and Principle,
pp. 251-562. Also, Khouri, The Arab-Israel Dilemma, p. 406.
27 For a detailed comparison of the differences between
the accords and Begins original Home Rule plan offered in
December 1977, see Sicherman, Palestinian Self-Government (Autonomy),
pp. 13-14.
28 Quandt, Camp David, pp. 255-56; Khouri, The
Arab-Israel Dilemma (3rd ed.), pp. 407-08. Also see Safty, From
Camp David to the Gulf , pp. 78-84.
29 Quandt, Camp David, pp. 260-61.
30 Tillman, The United States in the Middle East,
p. 134.
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid. , p. 132. Also see Rubenberg, Israel
and the American National Interest, pp. 138-39.
33 Foundation for Middle East Peace, Report
on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories, Special
Report, July, 1991 (Washington, DC); Aronson, Creating Facts,
p. 70.
34 Author interview with Geoffrey Aronson, Washington,
DC, Jan. 24, 1994.
35 Associated Press, Washington Times , 5/9/92.
36 Quandt, Camp David, p. 255.
37 State Department, American Foreign Policy 1977-1980,
p. 667; US Assistance to the State of Israel, Report by the
Comptroller General of the United States, GAO/ID-83-51, US
Accounting Office, June 24, 1983.
38 Quandt, Camp David, p. 316; Safty, From
Camp David to the Gulf, pp. 85-88.
Donald Neff
is the author of Fallen Pillars: U.S. Policy Towards Palestine
and Israel since 1945. It, along with his Warriors trilogy
on U.S.-Mideast relations, is available through the AET
Book Club. |