The era of change is upon us—or so President Obama and his new administration would like to think. Yet as Obama's administration embarks on its mission to bring real change to the world, some lingering problems stand in the way. One such problem is the centuries-old conflict in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine.
On Thursday, President Obama and newly appointed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that George Mitchell '54 would serve as the administration's special envoy to the Middle East. What exactly does this appointment mean for America's approach to one of the world's hottest hotspots? To answer that question let's examine why Clinton and Obama chose the former Bowdoin grad for this hefty assignment.
Mitchell is best known for his time on Capitol Hill, where he served as the U.S. senator from Maine for fourteen years (1980-1994) and as the Senate majority leader for five years (1989-1994). As a senator, Mitchell was respected by Democrats and Republicans alike for his dedication, honesty, and willingness to work across party lines.
After his time in the Senate, Mitchell agreed to serve as the chairman of the international committee on disarmament in Northern Ireland and later as chairman of the peace negotiations that resulted in the decisive Good Friday agreement. After achieving something that few thought was possible—peace in Ireland—Mitchell was asked to chair an international fact-finding committee on the conflict between Israel and Palestine. His work resulted in his receipt of the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Liberty Medal.
But will Mitchell and the Obama administration really be able to bring peace to a region that has been mired in conflict seemingly from the beginning of history? Previous administrations have tried without success to bring about lasting peace in the region, so why should this attempt be any different? The recent Israeli attack on Gaza in response to Hamas' terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens has once again brought this conflict to the international forefront. No longer can we sit back and say, "We've tried our best and failed so there's no hope." Not if this administration wants the world to believe in their popular slogan, "Yes we can."
Although the two sides of the conflict seem more divided than ever and the possibility of peace seems as hopeless as it has been in years, there are a few key reasons I'm willing to jump on board with George Mitchell and the administration in believing that peace can be achieved.
First of all, the appointment of a man of Mitchell's considerable foreign policy stature to the role of a special envoy demonstrates the urgency and importance with which the new administration views the goal of peace in the Middle East. Success in this endeavor would arguably be the single most important feat of the administration in securing America and reasserting our country's position as the leader of the world and a champion of peace.
Furthermore, the situation in the Middle East is every day becoming more unbearable for its inhabitants, which could and should lead to more popular demand for both the Israeli and Palestinian governments to work swiftly to reach an agreement. Recent polling data suggests that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would support a two-state solution in which the Palestinian state would include the West Bank and Gaza Strip areas.
Unfortunately, matters are complicated by the 2006 Palestinian election of Hamas. Its leaders have publicly stated that they do not and will not recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas' takeover of Gaza has led to considerable violence and countless civilian deaths in the area. Yet behind these harsh words and harsher actions there remains a glimmer of hope: Hamas has also stated that it would be open to a long-term truce with Israel and views America's election of President Obama as a sign that America is ready to lead and willing to listen if renewed peace efforts are planned. The cease-fire, agreed to on the eve of President Obama's inauguration, is perhaps most indicative of the two sides' willingness to give the new American administration a chance at resolving this conflict.
George Mitchell accepted the post of special envoy with no illusions regarding the gravity of the problem at hand saying, "I don't underestimate the difficulty of this assignment." But more telling was the conviction in his voice when he said, "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended. Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings." Mitchell may not be able to overcome all the obstacles to the pursuit of peace, but we can be sure that he won't be giving up anytime soon. If he's not going to stop trying, we should not stop believing.
Craig Hardt is a member of the class of 2012.