Opinion, May 24, 2003, Al-Jazeerah.info

Home

Time to rejuvenate a half-century-old declaration,

Geoffrey Aronson

The Daily Star, 5/24/03

The Middle East is chock a block with anniversaries and days of remembrance, most of which chronicle the region’s history of conflict and tragedy. May 25, on the other hand, is the 53rd anniversary of an all-but-forgotten declaration by the US, Britain, and France, that holds the key to the region’s renaissance.
On May 25, 1950 the governments of France, England, and the United States issued the aptly named Tripartite Declaration. In this short document the signatories affirmed their opposition to an arms race between Israel and its Arab antagonists; promised to transfer arms only to those nations for legitimate self-defense; and most importantly pointed out their “unalterable opposition to the use of force or the threat of force between any of the states in that area”and offered to take action, “within and outside the United Nations,”to guarantee the sanctity of all borders, including the armistice lines separating Israel and its neighbors.
The declaration wasn’t perfect. It excluded the Soviet Union, which subsequently worked to undermine the West’s hegemonic role in the region. France fueled an arms race by its sales to Israel, and together with England and Israel, made war against Egypt.
Nevertheless, the basic principles highlighted by the announcement, which acknowledged the intimate relationship between a comprehensive peace, borders, and arms sales, remain instructive today.
The creation of regional stability requires a view of the Middle East that aspires to solve the Palestine problem by refashioning security doctrines that are the foundation for Israel’s continuing occupation. Iraq’s defeat for example, marks a definitive end to the concept of an “eastern front” with the capability to threaten Israel. Since 1967, Israel has justified its demand for control of the Jordan Valley by referring to the potential for an attack from the east, through the Jordan Valley to Jerusalem and Israel’s heartland. The need to control the Jordan Valley created an open-ended requirement to control territory, serving as the strategic inspiration for Israel’s occupation and settlement policies throughout the West Bank.
The disappearance of the eastern front marks a historic improvement in Israel’s regional security, even as it undermines a principle rationale for Israel’s rule over Palestinians in the West Bank.
A new tripartite declaration could take advantage of such opportunities created by the recent war. It would view regional security not as the zero sum game that it has long been but recognize the possibility, for the first time in a generation, to create dynamic, interdependent relationships that improve the security of all nations in the region.
How might this be accomplished? An international guarantee of the borders of all nations in the region is a necessary first step. At the height of the Suez crisis, US President Dwight Eisenhower offered an antidote to war that remains relevant today. On Nov. 9, 1955 Eisenhower, reaffirmed America’ commitment to the Tripartite Declaration so recently violated by its other signatories, and offered to establish “treaty engagements to prevent or thwart any effort by either side to alter by force the boundaries between Israel and its Arab neighbors.”
For borders to be guaranteed, however, there must first be borders. Israeli security concerns, which have historically been addressed through direct control of (occupied) territory would be transformed by this new international demarche, undermining the strategic rationale for occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The state of Palestine would be established, and an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights implemented in a regional environment guaranteeing through international convention and US treaty obligation the enhancement of the national security of all states in the region.
The other critical element of the equation is arms sales. In the 1950s jet aircraft were at the leading edge of the quest for military superiority. Today, countries pursue advantage through the deployment of integrated systems for the delivery of conventionally and nonconventionally armed missiles or for defense against such weapons. Iraq has, at least for the foreseeable future, been stripped of such capabilities, but there remain compelling reasons for other countries in the region, including Iran, and Israel to pursue new capabilities and enhance existing ones. The implicit message that the Bush administration is sending today ­ that it is prepared to wage war to preserve Israel’ nuclear monopoly ­ is a prescription for continuing regional instability and war.
A new international declaration, building upon the security generated by international and US treaty commitments to the sanctity of recognized borders, would transform national security requirements from Egypt and Israel to Saudi Arabia and Iran. Establishing binding international oversight of arms transfers to the region, which would include all suppliers, including North Korea, would be far easier in such an environment than it was in the 1950s.
A regional security framework that improves the prospects for Middle East peace rather than sows the seeds for the next war is far less a fantasy than the vision currently animating US policies. It is an aspiration that inspired the stillborn Tripartite declaration over half a century ago. It’s long past the time to try again.

Geoffrey Aronson is the director of the Foundation for Middle East Peace in Washington, DC. He wrote this commentary for The Daily Star

2002-2003 Copyright © aljazeerah.info & aljazeerah.us. All Rights Reserved.

editor@aljazeerah.info