U.S. credibility at stake in Middle East

Egypt continues to be among the countries trying to bring peace in the Middle East. Its Ambassador to Indonesia, Ezzat Saad, talked to The Jakarta Post's Claire Harvey, about his country's stance on Palestine. The following is the excerpt of the interview.

Question: What is Egypt's opinion of the short-term prospects for peace in the Middle East?

Answer: It is difficult to talk about peace without an immediate cease-fire and full withdrawal of Israeli forces from the West Bank. Any new initiative, such as convening a regional conference as the Israeli Prime Minister Sharon suggested recently, should be aimed at implementing the previous agreements and the related arrangements. Palestinian President Yasser Arafat should attend, if the conference will be held on summit level.

We cannot imagine that any objective observer can ask for condemnation of a legitimate resistance to foreign occupation. It is very well known that Sharon's political agenda is to return the situation in the Palestinian occupied land to its pre-Oslo days having a new deal with a collaborationist leader, after toppling President Arafat, who can accept his preferred terms for permanent peace: i.e. Palestinian autonomy over disconnected enclaves of the West Bank without free access to Gaza and to neighboring Arab countries, without sovereignty in East Jerusalem and without the right of Palestinian refugees to return.

What is Egypt's reaction to the incursions by Israel into the Palestinian territories?

From the very beginning Egypt had warned the Israeli leadership of the serious consequences of the incursions into the Palestinian cities. At the same time, Egypt requested sponsors of the peace process, specially the Americans, and the European Union to intervene immediately.

Within the framework of the United Nation, the Arab group, supported by the other Islamic countries including Indonesia, requested an urgent meeting for the Security Council to adopt a Resolution to provide protection for the Palestinian people, an attempt that has failed, as it was the case many times before, because of the American veto.

Instead, and under pressure of the Arab and the world public opinion, as manifested in demonstrations in many capitals, it was the United States delegation that drafted a resolution calling upon Israel to withdraw from West Bank (resolution No. 1402). However the resolution was not implemented till now because of its non-binding nature.

On the bilateral level, Egypt withdrew its ambassador from Israel since November 2000 because of the continuation of the grave situation in the occupied territories and the failure of Israel to comply with the relevant Security Council resolutions. By the end of last March, Egypt suspended all government-to- government contacts with Israel except any diplomatic contacts that will be in the interest of the Palestinian people.

What can Egypt and other nations, particularly Indonesia, do to help the situation?

I think we have the legal framework for a comprehensive settlement of the conflict. On the one hand, we have the relevant UN Security Council resolutions especially No. 242 and No. 338, the principle of land-for-peace and, on the other hand, we have the Oslo Agreements and the related arrangements that have been signed by the Israelis and the Palestinians.

The problem here is the implementation of the Israeli obligations. I believe that the role of Egypt and the other peace loving countries, including Indonesia, is to convince the states that accord a biased treatment to Israel, particularly the U.S., to ensure the respect and implementation of international legitimacy, to demonstrate the awareness of the need to bring stability and security of both the region and the world.

Do you believe there has been an adequate response by the United Nations?

From the very beginning Israel resisted all attempts to bring the conflict into the UN agenda. As for the Arabs, and the majority of the member states, they tried hard to involve the UN as the proper forum to deal with such international conflict with all its impacts on the international peace and security. The problem here is that the charter of the organization entrusted the Security Council with certain exceptional powers based on its special responsibilities for maintaining international peace and security.

Unfortunately the practice of the Security Council, especially since the 1990s till now, is not as the drafters of the Charter intended for the council to do. The Arab-Israeli conflict is a very clear example in this regard.

Thus it is no wonder that the Arab group, and the great majority of the international community that support the Palestinian cause, failed to have a binding UN security council resolution to provide international protection for the Palestinians from the Israeli aggression.

Even when the Arab group requested sending an investigation team to Jenin refugee camp to assess the human tragedy that took place there, the U.S. delegation threatened to use the veto and at the end we had to accept just a fact-finding mission whose members are now subject to the approval of Israeli government.

However, we appreciate the efforts of Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary General, to ease the situation. Besides his participation in adopting a declaration on April 10 together with the EU, U.S. and Russian Federation, calling upon Israel to implement the relevant Security Council resolutions, his special envoy to the region, Terge Roed-Larsen, visited the Jenin refugee camp where he issued a statement condemning the Israeli government and accusing it of failing to mount rescue efforts that could have saved Palestinian lives in the devastated camp.

What is your opinion of the role of the United States in the present conflict?

The U.S. has a vital role to play, not only as a sponsor for the peace process but also because of its special relations with Israel and the fact that the U.S. assume special responsibilities in maintaining international peace and security as the major super power.

Israel's attempt to equate its criminal acts and exercise of state terrorism against the Palestinian people to the measures adopted by the U.S. against international terrorism in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks would only undermine the credibility of the collective international efforts to combat international terrorism and -- if this is tolerated -- would necessitate a reconsideration of the stance towards international cooperation against international terrorism.

What further action should be taken by Arab nations, by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and by the UN?

What is needed now is collective coordinated efforts to convince the American administration of the fact that it will be very difficult to talk seriously and credibly about an effective coalition against terrorism, while the Israeli government continues its defiance of the whole international community, which has repeated demands over the past four weeks for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from Palestinian occupied territories.

We also have to work hard for more involvement of the EU as an important economic and trade partner of Israel.