The Quartet: Can it be Effective?
By Geoffrey
Kemp
From the July 21, 2002 edition of Al-Ittihad
Following President Bush’s speech on the Arab-Israeli crisis on April 4, 2002, Secretary of State Colin Powell visited the Middle East and Europe. In Madrid he met with representatives from the European Union, the United Nations, and Russia. The so-called "Quartet" emerged with the purpose of organizing a Middle East conference later in the summer. Although the conference has been postponed, the Quartet is very much alive and had an important meeting in New York on July 15th to discuss ways to implement an Arab-Israeli settlement.
At first glance the composition of the group makes it look unworkable. Yet this combination of power centers is necessary to pave the way for progress. That the United States will be the dominant member is self evident, but what is less appreciated is that Colin Powell, having lost several important arguments to hardliners in Washington, needs the support of the international community if he is to continue to influence Bush’s White House. Fortunately he has a close relationship with the European Union’s foreign affairs representative, Javier Solana. Solana and his staff, by and large, share Powell’s approach to the Middle East and believe that they should do all they can to support him in his efforts. There is no likelihood that Europe will go its own way on Middle East policy as it has done in the past. The EU now has a common foreign policy towards the Middle East that argues the United States and the European Union must work together to achieve mutual objectives.
Russia’s participation in the Quartet is more than window dressing. In 1991 the then Soviet Union and the United States co-chaired the Madrid Peace Conference. Even though the Soviet role in organizing the conference was minimal, it was considered important to bring the more liberal attitudes of Mikhail Gorbachev and his Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze into the international arena and cooperate with Moscow. That would have been inconceivable a year or so earlier. Today Russia has a relevant role because it has good relations with most Arab countries. It also has increasingly close ties to Israel given the large number of Russians who now live there and do business in Russia and other countries from the former Soviet Union. Russia also has unique ties to both Iraq and Iran which can be helpful in a crisis.
As for the UN, Secretary General Kofi Annan can often be a persuasive negotiator, particularly in the third world. The UN presence in the Quartet provides an aura of legtimacy to the enterprise that would be lost if membership were restricted to the rich and powerful countries.
None of this implies that the Quartet will be successful. Disagreements on the status of Arafat are presently the most pronounced differences between the US and the three other interlocutors. But their disagreements pale in comparison to their common agenda which is a peace settlement based on an equitable resolution to the conflict, including a two state solution, security for Israel and the Palestinians, and a major effort to address the looming humanitarian crisis within the Palestinian community. Furthermore, an ultimate settlement must include the participation of the key Arab countries, including Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Arab Gulf states and Syria. In this regard, the combined lobbying efforts of the Quartet are likely to be more effective than that of the United States acting alone. The Arab world is nervous and ambivalent about American foreign policy, especially the looming prospect of confrontation with Iraq and the strong belief that the Bush Administration is biased in its dealing with the Palestinians and Israelis.
In the absence of any other road map for progress and the unwillingness of the Bush Administration to take the burden on itself the way the Clinton Administration did in seeking a Middle East settlement, the Quartet may be the best we can hope at this time. This requires that we do not dismiss the Quartet’s efforts, at least until they have had more months to demonstrate their capabilities and resolve real problems in a timely and effective manner.
