|
JPL president, Jerome M. Segal, is interviewed on CNN's Moneyline News
Hour with Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR, LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE: Today`s suicide
bomb attack in Israel reminds everyone of the cost of failure in this search
for peace. My next guest is an advocate of a strong U.S. role in brokering a
peace deal. He believes the United States should use its influence in the
United Nations Security Council to impose a territorial settlement on the
Israelis and the Palestinians.
Professor Jerome Segal joins me now, a senior research scholar at the
Center for International Security Studies at the University of Maryland.
Professor, good to have you with us.
JEROME SEGAL, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: Thank you.
DOBBS: The United States, President Bush, this administration
stepped up its engagement, if you will. Very little to show for it. What do
you think should be done next?
SEGAL: Well, I think we have to recognize a key fact, which is
that bilateral negotiations between the Sharon government and Arafat`s PLO
are -- is not going to lead to an end to the conflict.
Instead, we have to search for another model, and, basically, we have to
go back to the kind of approach that we took at the time of the creation of
Israel, which was the United Nations.
I think the first step should be that the Security Council should assert
its legal authority to determine who has sovereignty in the West Bank and
Gaza. These are areas that are not under the sovereignty of any country, and
Israel doesn`t even claim sovereignty there.
After the...
DOBBS: But -- but, if I may, Professor, Israel has rejected out of
hand a role for the United Nations here. The United States has been tepid
bid at best in supporting Kofi Annan`s call for peace and a peacekeeping
force there. How would you expect that to unfold?
SEGAL: American leadership, it would have to be an American plan,
and it would proceed without getting the consent of the Israeli government,
or the Palestinians, for that matter. It would be the international
community deciding that it, through the Security Council, has the authority
to determine who has sovereignty here. And it would proceed.
What it would do after having asserted its authority, it would then turn
to the PLO and say, in theory, we`re prepared to allow the establishment of
a Palestinian state, and allow you to establish a government. But there are
conditions that you`re going to have to meet. And these conditions would be
hard.
The PLO would have to accept Israel as a Jewish state. It would have to
accept that the boundary that the Security Council would determine would be
the end of conflict. It would have to demonstrate the classic attribute of
sovereignty -- that is, a monopoly of force in the territories.
It would have to disarm all the non-state actors. It would have to accept
a ban on the importation of weapons and accept international inspectors
under American leadership.
DOBBS: This is, Professor, what the United States should do,
obviously a paramount role for the United Nations. Have you discussed this
with the administration, with the Israelis, with the Palestinians? And if
so, what reaction?
SEGAL: Well, the Israeli government, of course, is very strongly
opposed to this. Not just the question of process, but in terms of
substance. Because what I`m proposing is a Palestinian state that would be
quite similar to what President Clinton proposed.
The American -- the Bush administration also is not prepared for this
because the administration at this point is not prepared to enter into
basically hardball with the Sharon government.
On the other hand, the strong public support for this -- in the United
States there was a poll released last week that showed 67 percent, as
opposed to 27 percent of Americans, favored having the United Nations
Security Council in fact draw the border.
And, among the Israeli public, not for this particular proposal we
haven`t polled, but we found that 65 percent of the Israeli public favors an
international conference in which the international community would in fact
construct a solution, complete solution, and propose it to both sides.
So there`s a will now for a much more forceful approach coming from the
public. It`s really a question of whether or not the American government is
prepared to move in this direction. And that`s the key decision that the
Bush administration has to make.
Is it just trying to manage the conflict? Or is it really seeking to end
it? If it`s seeking to end it, it will have to move beyond bilateral
negotiations.
DOBBS: Professor Jerome Segal, thank you for being with us.
SEGAL: My pleasure.
Go back to JPL & The Media for more analysis
and contributions. |
