Three professors discussed the implications and effects of the recent accord between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization last night during the first of a series of lectures on "The Search for Peace in the Middle East."
Anthropology Professor Dale Eickelman, Asian Studies Professor Shalom Goldman and Government Professor Diederik Vandewalle formed the panel, which addressed a Rockefeller Center audience. Martin Sherwin, the director of the College's Dickey Endowment for International Understanding, which is sponsoring the series, moderated the event.
The panel was part of what Sherwin called a "great issues forum" in the tradition of the "Great Issues Course" started by former College President John Sloane Dickey.
The focus of the forum was to discuss what Sherwin called "the big handshake" between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yassir Arafat at the White House Sept. 13.
In the agreement, Rabin and Arafat agreed to formally recognize each others' people, and Rabin agreed to a plan that would introduce self-rule for Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Vandewalle said the recent agreement between Rabin and Arafat was not a true "peace agreement" but merely a "declaration of principles."
He said the agreement might prove to be problematic because several key words are not defined, such as "self-autonomy for the Palestinians."
Also, the agreement does not address "sensitive issues" such as the water shortage on the West Bank, or security for Israelis in the occupied territories, Vandewalle said.
The recently signed agreement will not translate into a formal peace treaty until December, 1998, Vandewalle said. Within that five-year period, "spoilers" could potentially disrupt the peace process, he said.
"It is up to Palestine to create for themselves a completely new society" that is economically viable, Vandewalle said.
Goldman, an Israeli citizen and professor of Hebrew language and literature at the College, addressed the American response to both the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and their recent agreement. He said Americans have historically felt a connection to the conflict that is often linked to religion.
In his speech at the White House ceremony, Clinton called the event "history's defining drama." Goldman said that phrase was ironic coming from our "Baptist-born and bred president."
For the participants in the conflict, Goldman said, the event is seen in much less theological terms. "It's about land," he said. "God has little to do with it."
Goldman cited an article in The New York Times the day after the ceremony that noted that President Clinton's tie was "blue and yellow with little trumpets." Goldman said the tie was perceived to symbolize "cracks in walls we never thought would come down."
Eickelman looked beyond the formal accord between Israel and the PLO and focused on smaller signals that the Middle East is changing. He pointed to Israeli tourism in Morocco, the abundance of Arab Jews in Israel, and the $100 million commercial trade between Israel and Morocco as evidence that Israel's relations with Arab nations had been improving before the agreement.
Eickelman credited the gradual change in Arab-Israeli relations to the new generation of Middle Eastern citizens. The majority of Arabs and Israelis today do not remember the wars of 1948, he said.
One audience member asked about the role of the United Nations in brokering the accord and in further peace negotiations. Goldman said few Israelis have faith in the U.N. "The U.N. doesn't need new places to get in trouble in," he said.
The series continues during the next six weeks. In addition, the Dickey Endowment and the Russian Department are forming another panel tentatively titled "The Future of Russian Democracy" to address the recent struggle in the former Soviet Union.
