A role for three 'wise men'

THE DEATH of Yasser Arafat and reelection of George Bush create a new geo-political constellation in the Middle East, amounting to a "do or die" time for the world community. Either there will be an agreed framework for peace in the region one year from now, or yet another generation will endure the resulting turmoil. President Bush now has a unique chance to reach peace if he makes one bold, unprecedented move.

ADVERTISEMENT

Leveraging the work of those who came before him, President Bush should appoint a "wise men" triad consisting of Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Jimmy Carter to devote the next year to finding a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Individually, these men have impressive credentials in their own right in the Middle East and the world at large. Working together, they are a formidable team to rally forces in the region to take the difficult steps that need to be taken. The three have a credibility and effectiveness that no single president has. They could apply pressure collectively or individually as necessary. They each bring particular strengths and a personal history and commitment to peace and stability in the region.

Jimmy Carter has an association with the original Camp David mystique as well as a post-presidency do-gooder image. George H.W. Bush has excellent ties with, and great respect from, most of the current leaders, many of whom would need to be called on to lean on various Palestinian factions as well as Syria. Bill Clinton has the Oslo accord Rose Garden handshake to his credit, as well as the near-miss efforts of Wye River. None are beholden to the Jewish or Christian fundamentalist lobbies within the United States.

This need not mean the creation of a permanent new bureaucracy. The White House would remain in the driver's seat, using the National Security Council and State Department to call the shots and staff negotiations. There should be no expectation that this is a full-time role for the former presidents: The ability to call on their gravitas when necessary at crucial moments of the process is sufficient. It would require one very high-level personal envoy of the president to deal with the players in the region and with the former presidents to decide when and how to involve them.

A 12-month time frame should be established to add urgency and underscore the limited time commitment that three former presidents can devote to this. Yes, there would be attempts to derail the process, like every other negotiation in the Middle East, but an all-out effort by the Bush administration, assisted by the experience of his predecessors, could make the difference. In addition, the new generation of Arab Leaders in Jordan, Syria, Morocco, and elsewhere offer an unprecedented opportunity for real change. Efforts would also need to be made to include the existing Quartet members, Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations.

There are all sorts of reasons why this is a silly idea that could never work -- and in fact has never been tried in the modern history of the United States. Current and former presidents often have frayed ties with one another, even if they can bridge those differences in public. However, if ever there was a time when those who have held the highest trust of the American people need to overcome their differences, this is it. No doubt this would take a lot of guts for President Bush to do, but what has he to lose? If it succeeds he gets credit for achieving peace on his watch, and if it fails, well at worse he will have tried and ended up where other presidents did too.

We all know that our collective security rests -- in large part -- on finding a solution to the Middle East conflict and in helping that region to fully integrate with the rest of the world. The president says he earned political capital in the election and intends to spend it. This seems like a good way to do it.

Paul Smyke is senior adviser to the Managing Board of the World Economic Forum.