If and when the lessons of Camp David are clear and Israelis and Palestinians embark again on a journey of negotiations, will the Americans continue to be leading the way? Some commentators in the media feel that others may play a significant role in the process as well.

Camp David retrospectives
"Their premise is that any renewal of peace talks, however remote that seems right now, would have to use the Barak-Clinton era as a point of departure or as an object lesson -- or both."
New York Times, registration required

"A retrospective look may someday show that Barak at Camp David was heading along the right path to a reasonable solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Had he walked that path more circumspectly and consistently, and had Arafat demonstrated the courage to follow his lead, both peoples might have been spared even more painful vicissitudes."
Neue Zurcher Zeitung AG

"At the time there was a clear sense that the Palestinians had missed an unprecedented opportunity to achieve their stated goals. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, that initial impression has only gained in strength."
Jerusalem Post

"The Arab narrative about the failure of the Camp David negotiations and the eruption of violence is the mirror image of the Israeli narrative: Arabs blame Israel for what happened and continues to happen, in the same way that Israelis place the blame on Arafat."
Shibley Telhami, Washington Post

One of the charges raised about the Camp David talks is that they were a failure. This was not the case, according to leading Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat. Here's a look back at what Erekat wrote shortly after Camp David last year.

"Contrary to the opinions of the many pundits who were not even there, Camp David was not a failure. Camp David was an important, even historic, step in the 52-year effort to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. As someone who has been involved in negotiations since the 1992 Madrid Middle East Peace Conference, I can state categorically that Palestinians and Israelis are closer to a comprehensive peace agreement than ever before."
Saeb Erekat, Washington Post, August 5, 2000

Who should lead the way forward?
The Camp David talks were staged in President Clinton's backyard; some say he was betting his political legacy on a successful conclusion of the negotiations. But going forward, with the lessons of Camp David, the United States may not be leading the way and holding the hands of Israeli and Palestinian negotiators.

"If the United States and Europe wish to play an effective role in persuading Palestinians to implement a cease-fire and to abjure violence, two conditions must be met. First, the cease-fire must be linked to a resumption of a political process in ways far more credible than is now the case. Second, the United States and Europe must be prepared to declare that however reluctant Israel may be to affirm viable Palestinian statehood as the goal of the political process, they do not share that reluctance."
Henry Siegman, International Herald Tribune

"Quite apart from the terrible shadow of history, there is a rooted Israeli belief that most European governments lean toward the Palestinians. And many Israelis are convinced of a European media bias in coverage of the conflict."
Geoffrey Wheatcroft, New York Times, registration required

"Japan lacks the will, and it lacks the traditional, long-term ties of the Europeans to the region. But it was in a position to fill the vacuum and try helping both sides to wrap up a face-saving package."
Ehud Haran, International Herald Tribune

© 2001 Koret Communications Ltd. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.