A Study On The Policy Of American Middle East Peace Talks During Carter

This thesis researches on the Middle East peace talks policies of the U.S. during Carter administration by exploring the conduction and evolution of Carter’s policies from the time he took office to the signing of Camp David Accords. Before becoming President, realizing peace in the Middle East has become one of Carters main interests. Therefore, when he took office, he paid great attention to the Middle East peace talks at the beginning of term. Even in February 1977, carter and Vance had planned Vance’s first secretary trip to the Middle East. Upon taking office, Carter spurned the kind of step-by-step personal diplomacy which had been practiced by his predecessors Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger and conducted his Middle East policy based on a comprehensive settlement among all concerned parties.By the two trips of secretary Vance to the Middle East and the visits of the Middle leaders, American thought that they had found the solution to solve the Middle East peace problems comprehensively. According to the bilateral talks with the Middle East countries, the U.S gradually established a negotiation draft including basic principles and common concerns and a procedure plans for the negotiation and pre-meeting. The U.S. prepared to restart the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East with the Soviet Union. However, the results turned out that the U.S. had been too optimistic about the conflicts and disagreements among the Middle East countries and ignored the anxious of domestic opinions and Israel side towards Soviet Union.On October 1,1971, Joint U.S.-Soviet Statement on the Middle East was published, the two countries would be the co-chairmen of the Geneva Peace Conference on the Middle East. This event directly changed the attitudes of Americans and Israelis to the Middle East policy of the United States of carter administration. Americans worried about that Carter was using radical method to push the process of the Geneva Peace Conference, regardless Soviet might expand its influence over this area. Israelis worried about that this Statement might revise resolution 242 then the Palestinian problem would be more than a problem of refugee. Under these pressure, the carter administration had to change its policies and the United States had to compromise with Israel. Finally agreed to publish a respective Statement, emphasize the commons between U.S. and Israel.After this incident, the problem of Middle East peace talks had entered a new stage. The cooperation space between the United States and the Soviet Union on the issue was greatly reduced, the United States tried to deal with the Middle East peace problems unilaterally. At the same time, the distrust between both Arabs and Israel had deepen further, America would have to deeper involved in the conflicts between the two sides while pushing its policies.When Middle East peace process run into predicament. Carter’s "Allies" Sadat announced that he would make a trip to Israel. Sadat’s trip to Jerusalem is an important milestone in the development of the Arab-Israel relations, but it could not promote the Middle East peace process directly. During this period, the United States on the one hand, push the restart of Geneva Peace Conference, on the other hand also in coordination with bilateral talks between Egypt and Israel. In the end, when the Geneva Peace Conference was far away and not within the foreseeable future, when the opportunity of reaching an agreement between Egypt and Israel within the foreseeable future was gone after the collapse of negotiations at Leeds castle, the United States played its own card-the Camp David talks. Eventually led to the birth of Cmp David accordsOn September 17,1978, the signing of Camp David Accords marked the tremendous success of the Middle East peace talks policy of the U.S. However, the result was far away from the one he initially pursued. During this period, the Middle East peace talks policy of the U.S. changed fundamentally. The motivations and reasons behind this change were the main focus of this thesis.this thesis will also examine some of the key policy options making process, the policy background of decision making and the results. How the negotiations differences of the Arab-Israeli and then Egypt with Israel let them missed an opportunity to make peace? How the United States seized the moment to reach an agreement between the two sides at camp David?The first chapter researches Carter’s policies from the inauguration to the "the U.S.-Soviet communique". The second chapter explains the changes after "the U.S.-Soviet communique". The third chapter trails the generation and implementation process of Carter’s "Camp David talk". The fourth chapter concludes my thesis. The assignment of the camp David accords became the turning point in the Middle East peace process. In terms of the process of the deal, both supporters and critics (think the agreement is not to achieve a comprehensive peace), admitted that the United States played an important role. This thesis argues that the success of the carter administration shows that a successful strategy requires both mastery of objective factors, also need timely correction according to the events in the process and even depends on the decision makers’ subjective cognition strategy with unique personal characters.This thesis argues that carter’s judgment of the situation, his own beliefs, policy style and his relationships with both sides dominated policy making process. The evolution of the policy of the carter administration for the Middle East peace talks, reflected the complexity of the process of policy and politics, also reflected the unique content and characteristic of the policy of carter. The peace making process was established on the basis of Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy. It was a new pattern of great power mediation. The carter administration’s strategy turning from the early comprehensive strategy to camp David, embodied the American strategic insight, flexible methods. Analysis of the process provides a great case for us to study how did the United States make the best use of international and domestic conditions to achieve strategic success in the Middle East peace process.