Clinton battles growing anti-U.S. backlash

For President Bill Clinton, the success of the Sharm e-Sheik summit is not merely about saving his legacy as a peacemaker. It's about preserving U.S. gains in the Middle East over the last decade.

In a mere two weeks, the United States has become the target of a backlash that has exceeded that during the Gulf crisis in 1990. U.S. and Middle East diplomatic sources acknowledge that the bombing of the USS Cole last week in Aden could be the start of a campaign against U.S. interests throughout the region.

The key, the sources said, is an end to the anti-Israeli and anti-American backlash. They said any continued violence against Israel would affect the United States as well. So far, the State Department has closed nearly 40 embassies around the world, mostly in the Middle East.

The question isn't even whether Arafat can return to the negotiating table, the sources said. The question is whether Arafat will be swept away amid the current anti-Israeli backlash exploited by his Islamic opposition. The question is whether the Clinton administration can keep the lid on violence long enough to give its successor a chance.

"What is going to be at stake is no longer just violence among Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims and so forth, which is bad enough, but very serious threats to American interests in a way that is going to stress American relations with the region in a way that is going to put pressures on American assets globally," Shibley Telhami, a leading Middle East expert at the Washington-based Brookings Institution, said. "It's no longer about having a final status agreement. It is no longer about Clinton's legacy. It is now about serious national security interests of the United States, in a way that we haven't faced in a long time, and it has to be taken that way."

As Telhami sees it, the Arab-Israeli conflict has been transformed over the past two weeks. It is no longer a nationalist war, but rather threatens to become a Jewish-Muslim conflict in which governments have lost control of their people.

In this conflict, Telhami said, the mosque, rather than the military, provides the orders for battle.

"You are talking then about a conflict that knows no boundaries," he said. "You're talking about a conflict that goes well beyond the confines of Israel and the Palestinian territories. You're talking about involving other Arabs, other Muslims, and perhaps other Jews as well. And so, as a consequence, the scope alone is dangerous."

U.S. officials said that blaming Arafat for the current violence would be useless. They acknowledge that they overestimated his ability to make decisions and didn't take seriously Arafat's appeals against convening the Camp David summit in July. They also underestimated the influence of Hizbullah's successful guerilla campaign against Israel on Arafat's ability to compromise.

"I don't think it's useful to allocate or ascribe responsibility," U.S. National Security Adviser Samuel Berger said.

Instead, the officials said, they were swayed by the insistence by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who later convinced Clinton, that time was running out and a decision had to be made on an Israeli-Palestinian peace. They said Barak played on Clinton's fear that he would leave office without a major foreign policy accomplishment.

Even at Camp David, the officials said, they believed an agreement was possible. They said they were captivated by the excellent relations between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators during the Camp David summit and were convinced that the two sides were at peace's doorstep.

Aides to Barak agree that he, too, overestimated Arafat's power and did not insist on a relationship between Israeli and Palestinians. Now, the aides said, Barak is deeply disappointed in Arafat and has urged Clinton to wait until the Palestinian leader either dies or is replaced before resuming peace negotiations.

"We can't lose hope [for peace]," Barak said. "If not with this [Palestinian] leadership, then with the next leadership."

Today, diplomatic sources said expect Clinton and his certainly his successor, to drift away from Barak's approach for a comprehensive peace treaty with the Palestinians. They said Washington's pace will be slower and return to the incremental approach that in the first stage will include a Palestinian state. They expect support for this approach from Egypt, which remains the dominant influence over Arafat, but opposed by Barak, who has lobbied for the drafting of a full peace treaty.

Privately, even Clinton has acknowledged the limits of his influence over the last months of his presidency. Diplomats report that the president has told at least one Middle East leader that he has lost some of his effectiveness in the Middle East amid the current presidential race. Many in the region see him as a lame duck and prefer to wait until his successor enters office.

Over the last few weeks, there have been numerous examples of a loss of U.S. influence in the region: A dozen nations have violated the United Nations embargo on Iraq; Iran has continued efforts to torpedo the Middle East peace process despite U.S. reconciliation measures; Turkey has threatened to ban U.S. contractors because of a House bill that blames Ankara for the Armenian genocide; Syria and Lebanon have refused to curb Hizbullah's rising strength in Lebanon and abroad; Saudi billionaire fugitive Osama Bin Laden remains at large and continues attacks on U.S. targets in the region.

For Clinton, it could have been worse. Diplomatic sources said Clinton was helped by Egypt in stopping the Middle East from exploding. They said Egypt persuaded Arafat to agree to sit with Barak at the same table at Sharm e-Sheik.

Still, Egypt has marked its red lines, the diplomats said. They said Mubarak and other so-called Arab moderates, fearing a backlash by their people, have refused to urge Arafat to accept Barak's offers for most of eastern Jerusalem and other final status issues.

"I also place some of the responsibility on the Arab world more generally," said Richard Haas, former U.S. national security adviser and Brookings fellow. "Clearly, there has been a disappointing lack of any rallying behind the peace process. Again, the silence is deafening. Where are the voices in the Arab world for compromise and moderation? I do not hear them or see them."

U.S. officials said Clinton — whose wife and vice president are running for office in November elections — has made the Middle East the most important part of his agenda. They said Clinton has arrived in Sharm e-Sheik with a document and plans to keep Arafat and Barak at the summit until both agree to a formula that would end the violence and resume peace talks.

But in Washington few are convinced that this prospect is assured. "Now, we should be under no illusions," State Department peace envoy Dennis Ross said. "The good news is the parties have agreed to meet and the situation appears to be calmer. But the path ahead is difficult. After the terrible events of the past few days, the situation is still quite tense."