As president, Bill Clinton decides the administration’s policy toward Israel and the Middle East.
But it was Secretary of State Warren Christopher who anchored a pro-Israel team that many believe set a new standard by which future diplomats will be measured.
When Christopher leaves his post after President Clinton’s inauguration Jan. 20, U.S. diplomacy in the Middle East will have a dramatically different face.
In addition to Christopher’s resignation, announced last week just after Clinton was reelected to his second term, White House officials expect a major reshuffling of the entire Middle East peace process team.
No secretary of state before him logged more travel miles, including 18 trips to the Middle East.
And as America’s top diplomat, Christopher navigated U.S. policy through the treacherous waters of the Middle East peace process at a time of momentous change.
This is how the American Jewish community will best remember the outgoing secretary of state.
“History will remember Warren Christopher’s efforts to help bring peace between Arabs and Israelis as nothing short of tireless,” said Howard Kohr, executive director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby.
For Israel in particular, said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, “Warren Christopher is somebody who truly believes that the U.S.-Israel relationship is special.”
Since Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization signed their historic agreement on the White House lawn three years ago, Christopher has spent more time trying to achieve what all secretary of states before him could not: comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
Although not fully successful, it was on his watch that significant progress was made, including Israeli accords with the Palestinians, Jordanians and other Mideast nations.
Along the way, his quest included many controversial steps:
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat won a coveted Oval Office meeting with Clinton on Christopher’s recommendation.
Clinton sat with Syrian President Hafez Assad in an attempt to win a peace treaty between Jerusalem and Damascus.
World leaders gathered in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el- Sheik to condemn terrorism in the wake of a string of deadly suicide bombings in Israel. Some faulted the U.S.-initiated conference as “photo-op” diplomacy.
Attaining peace in the Middle East was so central to his goals that many believe that Christopher, 71, would have stayed in his post if Israel and Syria had been on course toward a peace accord.
But with Syrian negotiations stalemated and the Israeli-Palestinian talks stalled, Christopher decided to step down.
Not all Jewish organizational officials are sad to see Christopher go.
“Christopher was a major disappointment,” said Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America.
“He, along with President Clinton, ignored Yasser Arafat’s anti-peace behavior,” Klein said, citing the Palestinian Authority leader’s calls for “jihad, incitement of terrorists and failure to amend the PLO Covenant.”
Others were critical of Christopher’s approach to Israeli-Syrian peace talks.
“This administration was unrealistic about what could be accomplished through their diplomacy with the Syrians,” said Douglas Feith, deputy defense secretary during the Reagan administration.
“A sign of their excessively high expectations was the excessive high investment they were willing to make in the form of more than two dozen trips by Christopher to Damascus,” said Feith, who has been a vocal critic of the Clinton administration’s foreign policy in the Middle East.
Fans of Christopher sought to deflect such criticism.
“You cannot fault this administration for working every angle to put the peace process on firm footing against all challenges,” said Jason Isaacson, director of the Washington office of the American Jewish Committee.
At the same time, Christopher has won praise for his vigorous defense of the U.S. foreign aid program, through which Israel receives more than $3.1 billion a year.
While many praise Christopher for shepherding Middle East policy, some have taken him to task for not vigorously pursuing U.S. law that requires the State Department to begin plans to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
“This administration has again disrespected Congress’ constitutional role in the making of U.S. national security policy,” said Feith, who was instrumental in shaping the Jerusalem embassy bill.
The legislation, passed by Congress in the fall of 1995, requires the administration to move the embassy by May 1999, but to begin planning for the move immediately.
Feith cited a report issued by the State Department last week that indicated that no plans were under way to build a new embassy.
“The State Department’s non-responsive reports on plans to build the embassy are obviously contemptuous,” he said.
The administration, in its report, however, said arrangements could be made to rent space for a new embassy in time for the deadline.
While rumors abounded over who would follow Christopher, Clinton was expected to name a replacement as early as this week.
Aside from Christopher’s departure, White House officials expect a major reshuffling of the Middle East peace process team.
“We’re going to take a good hard look at reinvigorating the team,” said a White House official who requested that his name not be used.
Martin Indyk, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, could return to the State Department to serve as assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs after the expected retirement of Robert Pelletreau. And speculation is rife that Dennis Ross, special Middle East coordinator and a key player in the process over the past several years, will step down.
Shakeups on the president’s National Security Council could also mean new faces for Middle East policy-making in the administration.
Perhaps Christopher’s lasting legacy on the U.S.-Israel relationship is what Isaacson called his “deft piece of diplomacy” in proving that “the United States can be a partner and ally with Israel, expressing its solidarity, and remain a broker in the region.”
“The United States has not suffered by our unquestioning solidarity with Israel,” he said. “The next secretary of state could take a lesson from that.”
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
