Why should the United States intervene in the Palestinian-Israeli Peace Process?

The United States has been a part of the Middle East peace process since its outset. It has witnessed all of the agreements and signed as a guarantor. Under the Bush administration, the United States set itself up as a mediator, and laid down terms of reference for the process. The US was supposed to be imparitial and make sure that no party tried to derail the process. One of the principles set forth was that of "land for peace", as well as the illegality of the acquisition of land by force. It also stressed the necessity for the implementation of UN resolutions (especially United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 and 338) including those dealing with the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon, and the status of East Jerusalem. Letters of assurances were sent out to demonstrate the US's dedication to the process and to build trust among parties involved. (See relevant documents)

Since the establishment of Israel in 1947 by the UN, the United States has been its major keeper. It has been providing Israel with unequivocal support, and backing it up politically, financially, and technologically. It has not been responding to Israeli violations of humanitarian and international law, and has in fact been helping it keep issues off the Security Council agenda. Furthermore, the US has made a practice of vetoing any issues critical of Israel. Israel has become a domestic issue for the United States since all policies relating to Israel and the Middle East have a direct effect on Congress and the Executive branch of this government. Pro-Israeli Interest groups (such as AIPAC) are among the most influential on Capitol Hill. They donate large sums of money to campaigns, and have become powerful enough to make-or-break political careers. Figures for the 1996 campaign donations are available in the April/May 1997 issue of the "Washington Report on Middle East Affairs," starting page 43.

The United States has both an interest and a legal/moral obligation to intervene in the Peace Process. The Conservative, Liberal and Revolutionary perspectives have different interests, some of which can be reconciled, while others will remain in conflict, forcing some to prevail as "US foreign policy". Beyond these model perspectives, we have our own ideas about what the role of the United States should be in the Palestininan-Israeli conflict and the peace process.

U.S. policy on Jerusalem