
Historical Context
Explore the historical context through the events and the documents leading up to the 1991 Madrid Middle East Peace Conference:
- 1949: Israel ends the War of Independence without secure borders or Arab acceptance. The cease-fire lines give Israel more land than proposed by the 1947 U.N. partition plan for Palestine, and the Arab state authorized under that plan is not formed. Egypt holds the Gaza Strip, and Transjordan (soon to be Jordan) holds the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and the eastern side of Jerusalem with the ancient holy sites.
- 1951-1955: Jordan nears an agreement with Israel until King Abdullah is assassinated. Egypt blocks Israel-bound ships in the Suez Canal and tightens a blockade of the Straits of Tiran, threatening Israel’s oil supply and trade. It also supports terrorist raids that kill Israeli civilians.
- 1956: Israel, backed by France and Britain, invades Egypt and captures the Gaza Strip and Sinai. A cease-fire agreement establishes a U.N.-monitored demilitarized zone along the Egypt-Israel border, and Egypt promises unrestricted navigation in the Gulf of Eilat and the Straits of Tiran.
-
1957-1967: Israel withdraws from the Sinai and Gaza, which Egypt again controls. Israel endures terrorist raids across the Egyptian and Jordanian borders and Syrian artillery bombardment of the Galilee. The Palestine Liberation Organization forms with a dedication to armed struggle, including terrorism, to eliminate Israel. Supported by the Soviet Union, Arab states build up their military forces along Israel’s borders.
Document: PLO National Covenant, May 28, 1964
Significance: The PLO rejects Jewish history, culture and peoplehood, considers all of Israel to be occupied Palestine, and endorses terrorism to help free Palestine.
Excerpt: “Commando action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution. … The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty, and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.”
-
1967: Egypt moves large numbers of troops into the Sinai, orders U.N. peacekeepers to leave, again blockades the Straits of Tiran and expands its Arab military alliances. Israel launches a pre-emptive strike against Egypt, Jordan and Syria in June and, in six days of fighting, captures the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem from Jordan, Gaza and the Sinai from Egypt, and the Golan Heights from Syria. In the process, Israel brings nearly 1 million additional Palestinian Arabs under its rule, with many fleeing to refugee camps. The Arab League issues its “three nos” toward Israel: no peace, no recognition and no negotiations. The United Nations embraces the concept of Israel trading land for peace. The Soviet Union ends diplomatic relations with Israel.
Document: Arab League’s Khartoum Resolution, Sept. 1, 1967
Significance: The Arabs’ “three nos” at a summit in Khartoum, Sudan, shock Israeli leaders, many of whom have hoped that the military victory in June would force Arab states to talk peace.
Excerpt: “The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.”
Document: U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967
Significance: This resolution establishes the principle of exchanging land for peace. By omitting “the” from its discussion of land captured in the war, the measure incorporates ambiguity about how much of the captured territory Israel must return.
Excerpt: “A just and lasting peace in the Middle East … should include the application of both the following principles: “1. Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; “2. Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.”
Considering the Arab position, as formulated at the 1967 Khartoum summit above, what policy would you propose to Israel’s Knesset after the victory in the 1967 war?
Document: U.N. Security Council Resolution 338, Oct. 22, 1973
Significance: This resolution reaffirms Resolution 242, emphasizes direct negotiations, and provides the basis for a peace conference in December 1973 in Geneva.
Document: Resolution of the Arab League Summit at Rabat, Morocco, October 30, 1974
Significance: The PLO wins recognition from Arab states as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, superseding any role or any land claims by Jordan and Egypt.
Excerpt: “The Security Council decides that, immediately and concurrently with the cease-fire, negotiations start between the parties concerned under appropriate auspices aimed at establishing a just and durable peace in the Middle East.”
Excerpt: “The conference … affirms the right of the Palestinian people to set up an independent national authority under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization, as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, on any liberated Palestinian land. The Arab countries will support such an authority once it is established in all spheres.”
Excerpt: “Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the representatives of the Palestinian people should participate in negotiations on the resolution of the Palestinian problem in all its aspects. … Signatories shall establish among themselves relationships normal to states at peace with one another. To this end, they should undertake to abide by all the provisions of the U.N. Charter. Steps to be taken in this respect include: full recognition; abolishing economic boycotts; guaranteeing that under their jurisdiction the citizens of the other parties shall enjoy the protection of the due process of law.”
Document: Camp David Accords, Sept. 17, 1978
Significance: In addition to creating the framework for a treaty between Israel and Egypt, the accords outlined the goal of Palestinian self-rule.
Document: U.S.-U.S.S.R. invitation to the Madrid peace conference, Oct. 18, 1991
Significance: The invitees know that they all must agree to turn the Madrid conference into a peace process.
Excerpt: “The United States and the Soviet Union believe that a historic opportunity exists to advance the prospects for genuine peace throughout the region. The United States and the Soviet Union are prepared to assist the parties to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement, through direct negotiations along two tracks, between Israel and the Arab States, and between Israel and the Palestinians, based on United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 and 338. The objective of this process is real peace. … The conference will have no power to impose solutions on the parties or veto agreements reached by them. It will have no authority to make decisions for the parties and no ability to vote on issues or results. The conference can reconvene only with the consent of all the parties.”
Document: Letters of assurance, mid-October
The following are paraphrased highlights of the letters, as reported in various media.
To the Palestinians: The United States is open to any outcome and to discussion of any issue the Palestinians wish to raise. The residents of East Jerusalem should be able to participate in any interim elections. The final status of East Jerusalem is open to negotiation, and no interim arrangements regarding the city will affect the resolution. The United States opposes Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem. The United States opposes stalling and will push for a five-year process from interim arrangements to final agreement.
To Israel: Each set of bilateral negotiations is direct and independent. The PLO is excluded, and Palestinian delegates must live in the West Bank or Gaza. The United States does not support the creation of an independent Palestine. The United States will work to end the Arab boycott and to annul the U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism. Israel deserves a secure border with Lebanon and negotiated borders with Syria.
To Lebanon: U.N. Security Council Resolution 425, calling for Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, is separate from Resolution 242 and applies only to Israel, not to Syria.
To Syria: The United States agrees that simultaneous progress in all the bilateral talks is in the interests of a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Resolution 242 applies to the Golan Heights. The United States won’t recognize unilateral actions by Israel.
From these events and documents, consider whether the political and diplomatic conditions were ripe for successful negotiations.