دور الولايات المتحدة في حل النزاع دراسة حالة من مؤتمرا ت كامب ديفيد لعامي 1979 و 2000
خضر عبداللطيف محمد ابوعليا
Khader Abd_El_Latif Mohammad Abu_Alia
This thesis is a comparative case study of Camp David (1979) and Camp David (2000), with a focus on the U.S. role as the main broker between Israel and Arabs. The study aims to understand what actually went wrong in the Camp David Summit of 2000, and it reveals the real factors behind such failure. It explains the reasons behind the different outcome of both summits, even though both were held under the patronage of the U.S. as the main mediator. The objective of this research is to examine how the Palestinians can build a better relationship with the U.S. and how they can learn more about how the United States works, in order to influence U.S. policy, so that it takes better account of the Palestinian perspective and Palestinian needs. Such a change in U.S. policy is necessary for Palestinians to gain trust in the United States as a mediator in the conflict and perhaps, at a later stage, as an arbiter, too. This study briefly discusses the main interest groups in the United States and their role in the creation of American policies that support Israel at the cost of the Palestinians. The study analyzes the nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship in comparison with the U.S.-Palestinian relationship. It also discusses the use of U.S. foreign financial aid policy as an instrument in resolving conflicts, and it discusses mediation as a commonly used approach in conflict resolution. The role of mediation has rapidly developed over the last four decades and has become a tool of increasing importance to resolve conflicts. The study analyzes the role of mediation in resolving disputes and explores whether mediation is sufficient for resolving complicated and very controversial cases, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Resolving such a conflict perhaps needs to shift at a later stage from mediation to arbitration. Palestinians and Israelis need outside help to overcome the conflict between them. The United States has the most potential as the mediator and as an arbiter. The study concludes that the U.S. has not acted as a professional and fair mediator, which has caused the Palestinians to feel that there is an absence of neutrality practiced by the U.S. Therefore, the chances of succeeding in brokering a final, just, and comprehensive peace agreement are very slim. The conclusion recommends that Palestinians need to alter their approach to the United States in order to strengthen and improve relations; and ultimately moderate the role of the U.S. as a mediator in order to reach a just and permanent solution to the conflict with Israel.
الدراسات الاقليمية , Regional Studies