Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the study of influence
The Camp David accord
Essay on the study of influence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on the study of influence
The Camp David Accord
Works Cited Missing
By 1978 the thirty-year war that had been fought between Egypt and Israel had come to a point where there was a chance for peace. The area that had been at the center of the turmoil was the West Bank of the Jordan River and the Gaza Strip. The problem was that both countries believed that they had the rights to this land: Israel, biblically and Egypt, politically. So an invitation by President Jimmy Carter to President Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel was extended. The invitation was for a meeting in the Catoctin Mountains of Maryland at the presidential retreat, Camp David. The meeting was so that the framework of a peace agreement, known as the Camp David Accord, could be laid out between Sadat and Begin, with Carter as the mediator. Both Sadat and Begin had their reputations and their countries’ futures on the line, not to mention the future of the Middle East. All of the countries neighboring Egypt and Israel would be affected by an Egyptian/Israeli agreement of any kind and maybe encouraged to come to an agreement of some sort for that region.
A lot of problems had to be overcome for this summit to be a success. One of them was that the hatred and suspicions between President Sadat and Prime Minister Begin ran very deep. Another problem was that the outside pressures were too strong to permit an easy and early resolve for issues that had a long and ancient history (Mideast 26). The last problem was the hope that President Carter could put out of his mind the psychological profiles done by the CIA on both Begin and Sadat, which could have adversely affected his ability to mediate the proceedings.
The long-standing hatred between Sadat and Begin was not one of a personal nature. It had more to do with the political differences of their two countries. Israel has held that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were theirs because of the establishment of the State of Israel, out of what was Palestine in 1948 and by right of heredity. This was the land that God had told Moses was the Jewish Promised Land. The Egyptians, on the other hand, claimed that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were theirs. They based their claim on the fact that there were Egyptian citizens living in these areas at the time, the State of Israel was established, so therefore it must be Egyptian land.
In ...
... middle of paper ...
...reaty between them within three months of the signing of this agreement (Camp 43). So by the close of the summit, Begin had accepted the new “words,” which he once had considered improbable (Blitzer 48). For someone like Begin, who holds a lot of value in the power of words, this agreement was not easy to come by. What all the men involved wanted to know was how the meaning of the words would be translated on the ground in the months and years to come (Blitzer 48).
In the final analysis of the meetings at Camp David, it’s important not to focus on what was not accomplished, but on what was. The agreement that these two leaders came to was much more than a “framework for peace;” it was a first step in a long process. A process that many people here and abroad thought would never come. In the years that followed this summit, there were more and more talks that have lead to the relative peace in that part of the world today. So, what Camp David did more than anything else was to set the groundwork to get people talking to each other in a positive direction. The three men had progressed from an agreement to pray together to an agreement to try and make a lasting peace (Blitzer 48).
The two views of these to two men, David and Daud expressed different beliefs. One (David), is a Jewish Israeli. The other man, Daud, is a very upset Palestinian Arab. Throughout the discussion they both are bringing up each of the countries faults and seeing if any of these points can maybe be resolved. It seems however as though, for right now they failed. I personally have to side with the Israeli man David. His point is very clear for me to see and it seems that all the Jewish people are there to help each other and to have their own place to call home.
Carter is decidedly recollected, be that as it may, for the noteworthy 1978 Camp David Accords, where he intervened a memorable peace understanding between Israel's Menachem Begin and Egypt's Anwar Sadat. This key summit resuscitated a long-lethargic routine of presidential peacemaking, something each succeeding CEO has copied to shifting degrees. In any case, due to saw shortcomings as a residential and
The United States launched an operation known as Operation Desert Shield, also known as the Persian Gulf War, in August of 1990 in response to Saddam Hussein’s order to the Iraqi forces to take over Kuwait. President George Herbert Walker Bush made the decision to send American troops to Saudi Arabia to form an international coalition that would eventually turn into an operation known as Operation Desert Storm. The United States Army had not witnessed an event of such international and Homefront importation since the Cold War.
Many disagreements would arise in the negotiation process of the Camp David 2000 Summit that would eventually lead it to be unsuccessful. Disagreements such as the division of territory, the dispute over Jerusalem, Security and Refugee arrangements arose in the negotiation. Unfortunately this paper cannot explain all of the disagreement, it will mention some.
...d took control of the Gaza Strip once again. Anwar el-Sadat then became president after Gamal Abdel Nasser died in 1970. In an effort to take control of the Sinai Peninsula, Anwar el-Sadat attacked the Israelis. After a cease-fire, the United Nation’s troops then returned to keep things peaceful. Israel then later withdrew and was only allowed to use it for non-military purposes. In 1978 a peace treaty was established between Egypt and Israel which influenced more peace in the Middle East. Although a formal treaty was signed in 1979. In 1981 Sadat was assassinated and Mohamed Hosni Mubarak followed him in presidency. The Sinai Peninsula was then returned to Egypt in 1982 after the Israeli troops withdrew from the region. Mubarak embraced Sadat’s policies and managed to climb to the top and be once again making Egypt known as one of the leaders of the Arab world.
Israel has been dealing with Palestinian pressures to give back the land that they consider “theirs” and other leaders have had different views on how to handle aggression from the Palestinians. Ehud Olmert’s views included handling the conflict with peace and not using violence. He suggested to Mohamed Abbas a convergence plan which centered around the idea that the Israeli people would be forced out of the West Bank which is an are...
The Israeli-Palestine conflict is an event that has been well documented throughout the course of Middle-Eastern history. The conflict dates back as far as the nineteenth century where Palestine and Zionist, will later be known as Israel, are two communities each with different ideologies had the same overwhelming desire to acquire land. However, what makes this clash what it is, is the fact that both of these up and coming communities are after the same piece of land. The lengths that both sides went to in order obtain they believed was theirs has shaped the current relationship between the two nations today.
The significance of the Moscow summit was bolstered by the fact that it went ahead despite the Communist spring offensive (which was partly carried out to disrupt or even force the cancellat... ... middle of paper ... ... y détente left at all by 1979 stalled following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, were suspended. The ‘Carter Doctrine’ which followed showed the U.S. reverting back to a confrontational stance in the Cold War and in effect, with both sides now not showing any commitment to a relaxation in tensions, this was the confirmation of détente’s failure. Bibliography · Cohen, W.I. ed.
...nt Carter tried to establish peace among Israel and other Arab nations. He brought Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat together at the Camp David Retreat Center where an agreement was made between the men and U.S. Troops were to be stationed in the Sinai Peninsula to keep watch.
The Yalta Conference was one of the most important events in history, let alone, this century. It took place from February 4 to February 11, 1945, at Yalta, Crimea, a port/resort. The three main individuals at this meeting were Churchill of Great Britain, Roosevelt of the United States and Stalin of the U.S.S.R, known back then, and now known as Russia. This meeting was to discuss the post war effects.
The issue of Palestine and Israel is one that has been hotly contested for over a thousand years. The last fifty years have been especially important in the history of the Jewish people and Palestinians. Since the death of Yasser Arafat on the 11th of November 2004 , and the election of Mahmoud Abbas as his successor as leader of the Palestinian Authority, significant steps have been taken towards a lasting peace. This will hopefully lead to a conclusion of the second Palestinian intifada, which began in late September 2000, and to an end of the oppression of the Palestinian people by the Israeli Defense Forces. Both Jews and Arabs have suffered heavily from the conflict, thousands of innocent civilians have died on both sides, and peace is in the interests of all.
It has been almost a century since the first Paris Peace Conference was hold, but even until now, it is a popular yet also controversial event in the history of the world. The Paris Peace Conference took place in 1919 involving more than 1,000 representatives from over 30 nations. The results of the Conference are five treaties regarding terms that, according to the Conference, shall prevent any upcoming conflicts among nations. Although World War II started only after 15 years, nonetheless, the treaties did function as a buffer between countries. Although many resolutions were discussed, the negotiation of the Conference revolves around four main topics, reparation from the previous war losses or limitations on the main Central Power, Germany, self-recognition, President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points, and the annexation of land.
Ethnic conflicts are well rooted in the world's history and perhaps inherent in human nature. This type of conflict is difficult to resolve as is evident in the situation in the Middle East. The ethnic conflict theory explains that it is not territory, politics, or economics that prevents the achievement of peace between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, instead, it is a deep-seated hatred of one another that neither group can overcome. The Camp David Summit in July 2000, the most recent attempt at fostering a lasting peace is a clear example of how ethnocentrism can prevents success.
Ripeness and readiness are good theory’s to explain why conflicts ends. They both show how multiple factors come into play to end a conflict. “Ripeness is not sudden, but rather a complex process of transformations in the situation, shifts in public attitudes and new perceptions and visions among decision-makers” (Rambotham, 2011: 180). The Oslo negotiations and the peace process are good examples of the readiness theory and its ease explaining the resolution of these conflicts. The Cambodian conflict poses more difficulty being explained through ripeness. When conflicts are multilateral poses a challenge to readiness theory. Adapting readiness theory
...ic Use of Multiple channels of Negotiation in Middle East Peacemaking’, 2001, A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of The Fletcher School Of Law And Diplomacy Tufts University, viewed at http://repository01.lib.tufts.edu:8080/fedora/get/tufts:UA015.012.DO.00003/bdef:TuftsPDF/getPDF on 10 April 2012 .