"Peace Process: American Diplomacy And The Arab-Israeli Conflict Since 1967" by William Quandt

U.S. Publisher: Brookings Institute, 1993
Translated by Al Ahram Center for Translation
Arabic Translation Published, 1994, by Al Ahram Center
for Translation and Publishing, Galaa St., Cairo,
Tel: 202-5786069; Fax: 202-5786833, 202-5786069;
email: ada@ahram.org.eg; internet: www.alahram.org.eg
Retail Price $7.35
Each of the past six presidents became deeply involved in the diplomacy, surrounding the Arab-Israeli conflict. The same will doubtless be true of President Bill Clinton. The hopeful message of this book is that the United States, if it plays its role of mediator skillfully, can contribute to a resolution of the dispute between Israeli and its Arab neighbors. Just as often, however, presidents and their advisers have misread the realities of the Middle East, have pursued flawed politics, and have contributed to a Middle East through a cold war lens. This study provides a detailed analytical account of American policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict since the crisis that resulted in the June 1967 war. Each administration's initial approach to the problem of peacemaking is assessed, along with the evolution of policy as it confronted the stubborn realities of the region and the mine fields of domestic political controversy. Given the complexity of the challenge, American policy has shown remarkable consistency and surprising successes. Egypt and Israel are at peace with each other and are both close friends of the United States. More recently, other Arab parties have begun to negotiate with Israel under American auspices. One point on which presidents of both political parties have agreed is that a U.S. role in support of Arab-Israeli peace is consistent with U.S. national interests. William B. Quandt, a senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies program at Brookings, participated in the policy making process as a member of the National Security Council staff in both the Nixon and the Carter administrations. He brings his direct experience to bear on the analysis of how decisions are made on a particularly sensitive foreign-policy issue.