5 - 11 April 2001
Issue No.528
|
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 5 - 11 April 2001 Issue No.528 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Shaking assumptions
If President Mubarak faced a difficult task in Washington, he was well-equipped to see it through, writes Ibrahim Nafie
In most bilateral relations areas of understanding are pinpointed and agreements concluded through negotiations between the leaderships of both sides. But not so in the US, where talks and negotiations weave a tortuous route through the various branches of the executive, from the State Department to the Department of Trade and even the CIA, and then through the two houses of Congress. These talks, in turn, are tempered by the influence of public opinion as expressed through the press, special interest lobbies and other institutions of civil society.
Through two decades of contacts with the US President Mubarak has shown himself adept at handling the intricacies of this system. Thus, it comes as no surprise that during his recent visit to Washington the president covered all bases. In addition to President Bush, he held separate meetings with various ministers and assorted individual and group meetings with members of Congress. He gave several press interviews, attended chamber of commerce sessions and spoke at Arab and Jewish societies.
On the surface such activities may appear routine. They are less so when sensitive regional issues -- the Arab-Israeli conflict and the situation in Iraq -- are at stake, and when the arrival of a new executive team in Washington coincides with a critical situation in the Middle East.
During the meeting between the two presidents in the Oval Office, all members of the new Bush team were present. There was Secretary of State Colin Powell, with his African features and military bearing, standing where Madeleine Albright once stood. Next to him was Condaleezza Rice, who has made her way from one of the poorest American neighborhoods, via Standford University, to become head of the National Security Council. There, too, was Donald Ramsfield in the place of William Cohen. And though these faces are not new, this assembly of personalities in the Oval Office bespoke a new configuration at the summit of the US decision-making process.
President Mubarak's task of winning over the new US executive team to his point of view was by no means easy. Unlike previous Republican administrations, the Bush administration has given firm priority to domestic over foreign issues. When Mubarak arrived in Washington, the entire administration was preoccupied by such issues as the two trillion dollar budget, electoral campaign funding reform, energy policy, the bankruptcy law, workplace regulations and environmental protection.
On foreign policy issues the new administration appeared to have no clearly defined outlook. On the Middle East, it held that the situation concerned only the parties directly involved and that "violence" must come to an end before the US would consider facilitating talks.
Mubarak had to contend with a determined mood in Washington not to get the new administration's feet wet. During his five day visit, though, he had several assets on his side. Among these are the respect he has gained through his long experience of dealing with America's political system, the unique strength and mutual importance of Egyptian-US relations, the universally recognised delicacy of the current situation in the Middle East and a proposal for an ambitious programme to enhance mutual cooperation through the establishment of a free trade zone.
Playing these cards astutely, the president made considerable headway. Though much follow-up work remains to be done there can be no doubt that he succeeded in persuading Washington to devote more attention to the situation in the region. As a Washington Post column put it, the US president can no longer sidestep foreign policy issues, particularly now that Mubarak has pointed out the urgent need for a solution to the Middle East situation. Indeed, there has already been tangible evidence of a new attitude. Twice during the president's visit, Colin Powell called Israeli Prime Minister Sharon to urge him to reduce Israel's use of force.
In addition, I was told by a highly placed US source that Washington thinks the situation in the Middle East is extremely dangerous and that it will continue to persist, alongside Egypt, to try and restore relative calm preparatory to the resumption of dialogue and then negotiations. In this regard, he added that Washington is not only asking the Palestinians to halt violence but also asking Israel to lift its blockade of Palestinian territories. Violence is not a solution for the Palestinians, he said, nor will a military solution stop the Intifada or bring security to the Israelis. He added that the new administration has learned lessons from the past and will not attempt to facilitate talks until relative calm is restored. When this occurs the US will work with its friends in the region, above all Egypt, and President Mubarak personally, to create a sound basis for realising peace.
Mubarak's visit also resulted in a closer American understanding of other Middle Eastern issues, not least those involving Iraq, Sudan and Libya. US leaders made it clear that they want Egypt to be a full partner, not only in the peace process, but in everything pertaining to Africa and the Arab and Islamic worlds.
The same applies to economic issues, which extend from practical programmes to boost economic cooperation to coordination between Cairo and Washington towards narrowing the gap between developed and developing countries in the WTO.
If such progress is encouraging, it remains to be said that Mubarak also had to contend with considerable bias in Washington with regard to the situation in Palestine. Few in Washington hear of the encroachments of Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory or the systematic murder by Israeli forces of Palestinian officials and civilians. On the contrary, Palestinians are portrayed as the aggressors, responsible for the collapse of Camp David II, while Israel is portrayed as having offered "noble" concessions.
Such a skewed picture is not solely the fault of misinformation circulated in the US. The Arabs, too, are at fault for not having devoted sufficient attention to presenting their point of view. If Mubarak's recent visit succeeded in shaking some of Washington's unjustified assumptions, Arab leaders, governmental institutions and media still need to devote greater energy towards this end. The US is too influential for us to allow its policy to be determined by a single point of view.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page