Catering for Israeli-Palestinian Peace

I was on the White House lawn for the first time, cradling the final documents. Presidential adviser George Stephanopoulos asked me why I was holding up an internationally televised signing ceremony. For months Israeli and Palestinian negotiators had met in secret in Norway. Now they were ready to sign an historic "Declaration of Principles" that would provide a road map to resolve their fifty-year dispute.1 I was preventing President Clinton, Prime Minister Rabin, and PLO Chairman Arafat from coming to the stage and Mr. Stephanopoulos wanted to know why. In retrospect, that September day in 1993 was filled with irony. The United States has often been accused of serving merely as a "caterer for peace." By this, I suppose, is meant passively hosting ceremonial signings rather than exercising "superpower responsibilities." (The U.S. has also, of course, been accused of the opposite-dictating solutions to life-and-death issues whose consequences Americans will not have to bear.) All I knew at the time was that the Israeli and Palestinian legal representatives were not agreed on the final wording of their document, and I was not going to allow the dispute to move on to the stage to the embarrassment of all concerned. This initial experience taught me there can be far more to "catering for peace" than meets the eye. Simply providing technical assistance in preparing documents or logistical support for negotiations can be tricky, even nerve-wracking.2 But third-party facilitators can play an invaluable role in defusing the emotional barriers that impede constructive problem-solving for more than ceremonial events. For the United States, this has meant careful attention to nurturing the negotiating environment for Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. The U.S. has used its influence to urge the parties to restrain their public rhetoric and encouraged them to engage in confidence-building measures. More generally, it has expressed unwavering support for the process and sought to instill a sense of optimism to help build constituent support. When, as has happened all too often, the enemies of peace have lashed out violently, the United States has used its influence and prestige to overcome shocks to the process. It has organized and hosted emergency summits, boosted its own counter-terrorism support, and given the parties the confidence to continue once they have buried their dead. It is within this broader domain of political support that a third-party lawyer can best define his or her role. A key function for a State Department lawyer is to advise U.S. government officials on the full range of legal issues posed by the negotiations. On the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, this has meant counseling on the legal framework for the negotiations and the rationale and consequences of the parties' positions. My role has been to advise on domestic legal authorities for the U.S. regarding financial support and assurances to the parties. In addition, a third-party lawyer in a position like mine can also provide more direct support to the negotiating process, and that is what I would like to focus on here. The first task for me or any third-party lawyer is basic to everything else-to listen carefully to each side's description of its approach and the underlying rationale behind its objectives. At the table the negotiators may be reluctant to go into depth about their proposals. This may be because they want to give the impression that they have no room for compromise. Alternatively, they may feel their position will be difficult to justify in detail, since it is based on domestic political factors or on interagency processes necessary to reconcile a variety of internal needs. But both sides may feel comfortable confiding in a third-party, who will thereby acquire a greater understanding of the negotiating dynamics than either side. By posing questions as a neutral observer, I have sought to encourage each party to review its own position more carefully and to see how it appears from the point of view of its negotiating partner. …