Introduction
Global change is one of the concerns for every country as it creates a problem for the world related with global warming, climate a change which includes sun’s intensity. There are volcanic eruptions and changes in the greenhouse gas concentrations.
There has been an invitation for US President Bill Clinton from Prime Minister of Israeli Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak during 5th July, 2000. There was a camp named as Camp David in Maryland for the continuation of their negotiations over the process of Middle East peace. This has been a precedent in 1978 Camp David Accords and there the President Jimmy Carter became the broker of this peace agreement between Egypt. This camp was however, represented by President Anwar Sadat as well as represented Israel by the Prime Minister Menachem Begin. During 11th July, the Camp David 2000 Summit was properly convened. However, they identified it as a trap and this ended by 25th July however it did not reach to any agreement. In conclusion a Trilateral Statement has also been issued which defined specific principles for guidance of future negotiations. This negotiation was mainly dependent over the concept of all-or-nothing approach just like “nothing was considered agreed and binding until everything was agreed. There was only verbal proposal and this introduces some ambiguity into the proposal because there were no written documents or evidence from any of the parties regarding this specific issue. This can be stated as one of the major reason why the agreement did not reach to an ultimate point or final status if the issues like territory, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, Refugees and Palestinian right of return, Security arrangements, and Settlements.
However, there was negotiation from Palestinians who have stated that there must be full Palestinian sovereignty over whole West Bank as well as Gaza Strip. Still they wanted to identify an one-to-one land swap along with Israel. There was historic position of Palestinians which was already made of territorial compromises with Israel as they accepted the right of Israel over the historic Palestine of 78% and they also accepted their state on other 22% of that land. However, as per the definition by Israeli of West Bank, they were offered with an initial 73% of West Bank by the Barak to from Palestinian state which is also less than 27% than the Green Line borders and also 100% of Gaza Strip. There was a specific virulent territorial dispute which was revolving around final status of Jerusalem. The leaders seen to be not fully organized for the central role in Jerusalem issue along with dispute in the Temple Mount in specific which they would recognize negotiations. That time Barak instructed their delegates for treating disputes of the central issue which will help in deciding destiny of negotiations. There was Arafat who admonished the delegation to “not budge on this one thing: the Haram (the Temple Mount) is more precious to me than everything else.” During opening of this Camp David it is seen that Barak already warned Americans regarding his non acceptance of Palestinians compared to purely symbolic sovereignty along with some portion of East Jerusalem.
Initially Arab-Israeli has helped a lot of Palestinian Arabs with war as they used to get expelled from their house which is now considered as Israel. There were around 711,000 to 725,000 refugees at that period. Now they as well as their descendents have numbered almost around four million which comprises half of Palestinian people. As of the period, Palestinian have also asked for proper implementation of their return right and the definition for every refugee might grant option for returning to their home along with their previous property and compensation. There were Israeli negotiators who have proposed that Israel must get allowed with the set up of the radar stations which is inside the state of Palestinian and this must allow the usage of its airspace. Israel should also want the rights of deployment troops of the territory of Palestinian during the event of emergency. This will also include stationing in Jordan Valley of international force. Authorities of Palestinian will try to maintain some control of border which crosses temporary observation in Israeli. They maintained a permanent presence of security with 15% of Palestinian –Jordanian border. During the mid times of October, Clinton and parties which holds the summit of Sharm El Sheikh, this resulted in “Sharm memorandum” which includes understanding that aimed into ending the violence and then renewing security cooperation. From the time of 18th to 23d December, they used to hold the negotiations which after that followed by Clinton’s presentation of their “parameters”. During their last attempt for achieving peace in Middle East before the second term which also ended in January 2001. The official statements stated that both of the parties have accepted Clinton Parameters along with reservations.
Most of Israeli as well as Americans used to criticize the failure of 2000 Camp David Summit that was leveled at the Arafat. The behavior of Arafat is portrayed by Ehud Barak at the Camp David as their “performance geared to exact as many Israeli concessions as possible without ever seriously intending to reach a peace settlement or sign an end” during the end of that conflict. The have Clinton used to blame Arafat for their failure of talks which stated that “I regret that in 2000 Arafat missed the opportunity to bring that nation into being and pray for the day when the dreams of the Palestinian people for a state and a better life will be realized in a just and lasting peace.” During 2001 Robert Malley who was present in Summit have noted that there was three sets of myths which arise related with the failure of negotiations. Those myths were related with Camp David’s idea test of Mr. Arafat’s intentions, Israel’s offer which met almost of the Palestinian’s legitimate aspirations, and lastly the Palestinians have made no concession of their own during that time. They also wrote that if peace is needed to be achieved, parties may not be able to afford or tolerate growing acceptance of myths as a reality. There was full support from Palestinian public for Arafat’s role during the negotiations. After the summit there was Arafat’s approval and the rating increased by 7% points which is from 39 to 46%. The overall 68% of Palestinian public have actually thought that Arafat’s position on final agreement at the Camp David was right and Arafat comprised of 14% which was too much and 6% thought that Arafat did not comprised enough. Barak at that time did not fare public opinion polls as well.
The report have certain set of research questions which is basically related with the question of why there was any fall short in camp David 2000. The aim of this report is stated clearly which provides an idea regarding what matter will be followed through and why this report is actually being initiated for. This dissertation have tried to follow certain literature papers which have enough amounts of data and information that helps in gathering relevant and required information which is actually appropriate for this paper. This paper focuses into the failure of the Camp David 2000 and it is seen that many researchers have already initiated similar kinds of topics which uses the similar data and information. Some of the papers have similar thoughts and theories applied for this concept; however, some of the theories have different opinion over this incident which is also discussed in detail. There was a point of agreeing or disagreeing with the presented facts from those literature papers. This dissertation paper have helped to gather the information regarding why any of the opinion must be agreed or disagreed and on what basis. As per the main objective of this dissertation paper, this follows the explanations of why the peace process during Camp David got failed and why there was blame over Yasser Arafat for their failure of peace talk and this blame was put by the American negotiators and Bill Clinton. There are many scholars who have actually blamed the issue of Jerusalem and there are also some scholars who have tried understand the opinion if Robert Malley as well as Hussein Agha. It is stated that there was also detailed explanation in some of the research articles regarding the three categories of failure of that camp.
For the methodology purpose there has been usage of secondary source which is the previous scholar articles, newspaper articles focus books and research papers which are already available in the authentic sources. This is very useful for this dissertation paper because it has helped with a lot of relevant items which was not highlighted during the time of issue but it was researched by some researchers and those facts are very helpful for concluding and testing out specific theories. There is also proper structure mentioned which helps in carrying out the dissertation on a specific and professional manner so that it is easily understandable and less complex. This also helps putting together the collected facts and information regarding the topic in such a way that final conclusion becomes quite easier to highlight. Included research timetable which states how much of the time is required for a specific section and be more efficient as much as possible. Clear ethics has been followed for this research paper and the help which is received from supervisor is also clearly stated. The dissertation paper contains some of the facts which is expected by supervisor to undertake and hence it is important to consider those points because it will help in attaining a clear picture of the whole issue draw certain conclusion regarding the fact. This will also help in adding some research points and value from a different point of perspective.
Analysis
Proposed research question
Objective of the dissertation
Aims of the dissertation
Your dissertation’s position in the existing literature
Bibliography
Methodology
Structure
Research timetable
Ethics
How will you utilise the help of your supervisor?
References:
Daigle, C., 2018. Beyond Camp David: Jimmy Carter, Palestinian Self-Determination, and Human Rights. Diplomatic History, 42(5), pp.802-830.
Kiely, K.P., 2017. Camp David and Discursive Power in Action. In US Foreign Policy Discourse and the Israel Lobby (pp. 167-192). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
McMahon, S.F. and Miller, C., 2013. Simulating the Camp David negotiations: A problem-solving tool in critical pedagogy. Simulation & Gaming, 44(1), pp.134-150.
Merson, S.D., 2017. The Influence of Innate Behavioral Predispositions on Conflict Stakeholder Interactions in Mediation: The Camp David Accords of 1978.
Quandt, W.B., 2015. Camp David: peacemaking and politics. Brookings Institution Press.
SMITH, S.R., 2014. Indivisibility: The Case of the 2000 Camp David Summit and the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif. PAX et BELLUM Journal, p.21.
