Amr Moussa: Israel Reacted With Negativity to Arab Peace Initiative

In the fourth episode of excerpts from the biography of former Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa - published by Dar El-Shorouk and edited and documented by Khaled Abu Bakr – Asharq Al-Awsat reviews Moussa’s efforts and the work of the Arab League on the Palestinian file.

In his upcoming book, “The Years of the Arab League”, Moussa dedicates two chapters of 66 pages to talk about the birth of the Arab Peace Initiative at the 2002 Beirut Summit, launched by the late Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, the Palestinian division between Fatah and Hamas over the Palestinian file, the Annapolis conference for peace, and then the Arab division in light of the aggression on Gaza in 2009.

In these excerpts of the first chapter, Moussa narrates the details of the Arab Peace Initiative and his role in drafting some of its provisions to overcome some of the differences over it.

He says that he assumed the position of Arab League Secretary-General while the second Palestinian Intifada was ongoing. The Israeli intransigence was continuous and even escalating, so was the stalemate paralyzing the “peace process.” Since US President George W. Bush officially assumed office on Jan. 20, 2001, until the events of Sep.11 of the same year, his administration did not present any political initiative to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Moussa says that the US administration regarded the Palestinian uprising as acts of violence, which should be only addressed with security measures.

However, things changed after 9-11, Moussa recounts.

He says that after the attacks in New York, while the American forces were completing their preparations for the invasion of Afghanistan and the US administration was busy mobilizing a wide international coalition to support the “war on terror”, Bush declared that the “establishment of a Palestinian state has always been part of the American vision as long as Israel’s right to exist is respected…”

The former Arab League secretary-general says in this regard: “In fact, as soon as I heard those statements, which are the first by Bush on a Palestinian state, I considered them as nothing more than a flawed operation, with its meanings and goals; at that time, I was aware that the man needed the support of Arabs and Muslims in his next war against some of their countries, and therefore, he had no objection to flirting with them on the central issue, which is the Palestinian cause. What confirmed my conclusion is that nearly five days after these statements, specifically on Oct. 7, 2001, the United States began its war on Afghanistan.”

Friedman and the Birth of the “Arab Initiative”

Moussa recounts that Thomas Friedman, a famous columnist for The New York Times, published on Feb. 6, 2002, a letter to Arab leaders purportedly on behalf of US President George W. Bush - under the title, “Dear Arab League.”

The letter says: “You’re the ones with the power to really reshape the diplomacy, not me. And here is my advice for how to do it. You have an Arab League summit set for March in Lebanon. I suggest your summit issue one simple resolution: “The 22 members of the Arab League say to Israel that in return for a complete Israeli withdrawal to the June 4, 1967, lines -- in the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem, and on the Golan Heights -- we offer full recognition of Israel, diplomatic relations, normalized trade, and security guarantees. Full peace with all 22 Arab states for full withdrawal.”

Moussa says that less than a week later, Friedman met Prince Abdullah, then crown prince, on his ranch near Riyadh. The American journalist wrote the details of that interview, which included the announcement for the first time of what was known as the “Prince Abdullah’s Peace Initiative in the Middle East”, before it was adopted by 22 Arab countries at the Beirut Summit on March 28, 2002, to become the “Arab Peace Initiative.”

“For my part, I say that the content of Friedman’s letter was preceded by a long discussion that extended throughout my last year as Minister of Foreign Affairs of Egypt and first year as Secretary-General of the Arab League, between me and him (Friedman) in Davos, on the best and most effective ways to lay the foundations for a balanced peace that takes into account the basic needs of both parties.”

Moussa adds: “Prince (King) Abdullah was the only one who had the status that qualifies him to present the Arab initiative… He had tremendous credibility with Arab public opinion, all Arab governments, and the world, and hence his proposal or initiative was a historic step that deserves full support.”

Syrian-Lebanese pressure to dicker over the initiative

Moussa says that the Syrians were not comfortable with the initiative of Prince Abdullah, as he did not consult with them before announcing it in The New York Times.

“I think that the Emir set his sights on (the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s) experience with the Syrians. He decided not to consult or coordinate with them before formulating the initiative, for fear that they would hamper it before its announcement.

Moussa adds that the Syrians did not openly declare their anger, but focused their efforts on criticizing the “full normalization”, which was mentioned in the initiative.

“At the same time, the Syrians brilliantly rushed to use the card of the “Palestinian refugees” and “the right of return”, which was not mentioned in the published details of the initiative. They were well aware of the Palestinian and Lebanese sensitivity to this issue because some Lebanese sects believe that the settlement of about 350,000 Palestinian refugees, most of whom are Sunni Muslims, distorts the demographic balance in Lebanon.”

Moussa continues: “On March 3, 2002 (prior to the Beirut summit and perhaps a prelude to it), Bashar Al-Assad made an official visit to Beirut. It was the first visit of a Syrian head-of-state to the Lebanese capital in more than fifty years. During the visit, Assad and Lebanese President Emile Lahoud issued a joint statement in which they did not explicitly refer to Prince Abdullah’s initiative, but said: “A comprehensive settlement with Israel must allow the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and the removal of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza.”

After Assad’s visit, the Saudis quietly withdrew the term “full normalization” from the official statements paving the way for the initiative. In this context, on March 10, Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal described the initiative as offering Israel “complete peace” in exchange for withdrawal to the 1967 borders.

The 2002 Beirut Summit

“On the morning of the opening of the Beirut Summit on March 27, 2002, Prince Saud Al-Faisal invited me to an early breakfast (about an hour before the arrival of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Syria, Faruq Al-Sharaa, for the same invitation). I noticed that he wanted to be alone with Saud… I had to formulate the initiative in its final form, leaving the issue of refugees and normalization until the end of the Syrian-Saudi talks. I sat writing at a distant table, but in the same hall. I intended to write the text in the presence of Syria, and to present the text to Saud in the presence of Sharaa.”

Moussa continues: “We were on the sixth floor of the famous Phoenicia Hotel in Beirut, and in the hall dedicated for VIP guests… I saw tension on Farouk Al-Sharaa’s face and little patience with Saud…”

“The truth is that Syria’s position added to the initiative and did not weaken it. I do not see that Syria was opposed to the idea of the initiative in itself, and I also assert that it was keen not to clash with (King) Abdullah. The important thing is that after the understanding that took place between Prince Saud and Farouk Al-Sharaa, I joined them… A discussion took place about the final wording, and Prince Saud said that Amr Moussa would be in charge of finalizing it.”

“I said that I will quickly prepare it and present it to each of them - perhaps while they are sitting here - before we print it and present it to the other ministers… Saud quickly viewed it and agreed to it, while Farouk al-Sharaa read it carefully, then stopped at the expression, “normal relations”, in a paragraph that says: “Establishing normal relations with Israel within the framework of this comprehensive peace.”

I told him: This is less than the complete normalization, which you have reservations about.” So he kept silent and did not comment, which I considered as a consent to the wording.”

Moussa recounts how Syria and Lebanon were opposed to the broadcasting of a speech by Yasser Arafat, who was besieged in Ramallah. He says he was frustrated when he saw that the position of the summit or some of its members was not sound at all, neither in terms of form nor in content, and made Israel smile sarcastically at the attitude of the Arabs towards the Palestinian President.

A negative Israeli-American response

Moussa says he did not expect a positive response from the Israelis to the Arab initiative.

“Because it will lure them into negotiating with the Arabs as a group on the Palestinian issue, a position that they have always rejected. The second reason that made me rule out a positive response from Israel is that the initiative is selling them “full normalization”… in exchange for the Arab land and the borders of June 4, 1967. In fact, based on my experience, the Israeli strategy seeks to win “free normalization” from the Arabs without the need to forfeit the land that is important to its national security.”

The former Arab League secretary-general says that he was surprised by the tepid American response to the initiative “even though many US sources and institutions were pushing for its issuance from the 2002 summit so that the Israelis could be “reassured” and the peace process moved forward.”

“Yes, the initial American reaction to the initiative was tepid, with State Department spokesman Richard Boucher describing it as just “an important and positive step.” A few days later, in the same tone, Secretary of State Colin Powell described it as an “important step,” but he stressed the need for more details about it (as if they were not aware of it!)”

When Israel bombed buildings outside the southern Lebanese city of Sidon, Mohamed Arkadan and his team rushed to an emergency unlike anything they had ever seen.

About a dozen apartments had collapsed onto the hillside they once overlooked, burying more than 100 people. Even after 17 years with the civil defense forces of one of the world's most war-torn nations, Arkadan was shocked at the destruction. By Monday afternoon — about 24 hours after the bombing — his team had pulled more than 40 bodies — including children's — from the rubble, along with 60 survivors.

The children's bodies broke his heart, said Arkadan, 38, but his team of over 30 first responders' inability to help further pained him more. Firetrucks and ambulances haven’t been replaced in years. Rescue tools and equipment are in short supply. His team has to buy their uniforms out of pocket.

An economic crisis that began in 2019 and a massive 2020 port explosion have left Lebanon struggling to provide basic services such as electricity and medical care. Political divisions have left the country of 6 million without a president or functioning government for more than two years, deepening a national sense of abandonment reaching down to the men whom the people depend on in emergencies.

“We have zero capabilities, zero logistics,” Arkadan said. “We have no gloves, no personal protection gear.”

War has upended Lebanon again Israel’s intensified air campaign against Hezbollah has upended the country. Over 1,000 people have been killed in Israeli strikes since Sept. 17, nearly a quarter of them women and children, according to the Health Ministry. Hundreds of thousands of people have fled their homes, sleeping on beaches and streets.

The World Health Organization said over 30 primary health care centers around Lebanon’s affected areas have been closed.

On Tuesday, Israel said it began a limited ground operation against Hezbollah and warned people to evacuate several southern communities, promising further escalation.

Lebanon is “grappling with multiple crises, which have overwhelmed the country’s capacity to cope,” said Imran Riza, the UN's humanitarian coordinator for Lebanon, who said the UN had allocated $24 million in emergency funding for people affected by the fighting.

Exhausted medical staff are struggling to cope with the daily influx of new patients. Under government emergency plans, hospitals and medical workers have halted non-urgent operations.

Government shelters are full

In the southern province of Tyre, many doctors have fled along with residents. In Nabatiyeh, the largest province in southern Lebanon, first responders say they have been working around the clock since last week to reach hundreds of people wounded in bombings that hit dozens of villages and towns, often many on the same day.

After the bombing in Sidon nearly 250 first responders joined Arkadan's team, including a specialized search-and-rescue unit from Beirut, some 45 kilometers (28 miles) to the north. His team didn't have the modern equipment needed to pull people from a disaster.

“We used traditional tools, like scissors, cables, shovels,” Arkadan said.

“Anyone here?” rescuers shouted through the gaps in mounds of rubble, searching for survivors buried deeper underground. One excavator removed the debris slowly, to avoid shaking the heaps of bricks and mangled steel.

Many sought refuge in the ancient city of Tyre, 20 kilometers (12 miles) north of the border with Israel, thinking it was likely to be spared bombardment. More than 8,000 people arrived, said Hassan Dbouk, the head of its disaster management unit.

He said that there were no pre-positioned supplies, such as food parcels, hygiene kits and mattresses, and moving trucks now is fraught with danger. Farmers have been denied access to their land because of the bombings and the municipality is struggling to pay salaries.

Meanwhile, garbage is piling up on the streets. The number of municipal workers has shrunk from 160 to 10.

“The humanitarian situation is catastrophic,” Dbouk said.

Wissam Ghazal, the health ministry official in Tyre, said in one hospital, only five of 35 doctors have remained. In Tyre province, eight medics, including three with a medical organization affiliated with Hezbollah, were killed over two days, he said.

Over the weekend, the city itself became a focus of attacks.

Israeli warplanes struck near the port city’s famed ruins, along its beaches and in residential and commercial areas, forcing thousands of residents to flee. At least 15 civilians were killed Saturday and Sunday, including two municipal workers, a soldier and several children, all but one from two families.

It took rescuers two days to comb through the rubble of a home in the Kharab neighborhood in the city’s center, where a bomb had killed nine members of the al-Samra family.

Six premature babies in incubators around the city were moved to Beirut. The city’s only doctor, who looked after them, couldn’t move between hospitals under fire, Ghazal said.

One of the district’s four hospitals shut after sustaining damage from a strike that affected its electricity supply and damaged the operations room. In two other hospitals, glass windows were broken. For now, the city’s hospitals are receiving more killed than wounded.

“But you don’t know what will happen when the intensity of attacks increases. We will definitely need more.”

Making do with what they have

Hussein Faqih, head of civil defense in the Nabatiyeh province, said that “we are working in very difficult and critical circumstances because the strikes are random. We have no protection. We have no shields, no helmets, no extra hoses. The newest vehicle is 25 years old. We are still working despite all that.”

At least three of his firefighters’ team were killed in early September. Ten have been injured since then. Of 45 vehicles, six were hit and are now out of service.

Faqih said he is limiting his team’s search-and-rescue missions to residential areas, keeping them away from forests or open areas where they used to put out fires.

“These days, there is something difficult every day. Body parts are everywhere, children, civilians and bodies under rubble,” Faqih said. Still, he said, he considers his job to be the safety net for the people.

“We serve the people, and we will work with what we have.”

Amr Moussa: Israel Reacted With Negativity to Arab Peace Initiative