Still awesome today is the vivid memory of seeing Sadat, the stately leader of the largest Arab nation as he was wlcomed by Menachem Begin, the courtly prime minister of Israel.

Captionnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

He later described the astonished looks on their faces when he 'teased' them about not taking seriously his February 4th l97l Peace proposal. (Some still refer to that 'plan' as the 'peace process')

(Meanwhile Sadat conferred with Syrian president Hafed Assad but was not successful in winning Syrian support for "my sacred duty mission."

On November l9th, Sadat's jet — Egyptian One — brought him to Ben Gurion Airport where he was greeted by a 2l-gun salute and welcomed by PM Begin, president Ephraim Katzir and numerous former and current officials.

The next day, he had prayed at the Al Aksa Mosque (with Begin?) and then visited Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Memorial. Later, from the rostrum of the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) Sadat spoke, passionately, in Arabic.

"The Egyptian people bless this sacred mission of peace," he told the l20 Knesset members. "I have chosen to come to you with an open heart and mind ... and to give this great impetus to all international efforts exerted for peace ... not to maneuver or win a round, but for us to win together, the most dangerous of rounds embattled in modern history, the battle of peace, based on justice.

"We accept to live with you in permanent peace based on justice. We do not want to encircle you or to be encircled ourselves by destructive missiles ready for launching, nor by the shells of grudges or hatred. Israel has become an established fact, recognized by the world.

"After long thought, I was convinced that the obligation of responsibility before God and before the people make it incumbent upon me that I should come to Jerusalem with all the facts surging in me. Then I would let you decide for yourselves."

Anwar Sadat's trip to Jerusalem and the Egyptian-Israel peace treaty which altered the terms of debate in the Arab world from how to destroy Israel to how to live peacefully with the now 59-year-old state. After Sadat's return from Jerusalem, I visited with his wife, Jehan, who explained that she did not accompany him, because of her need to prepare for mid term exams at Cairo University; and the expectant birth of another grandchild.

Coincidentally, the baby girl was born prematurely at the moment when her grandfather, Anwar Sadat, was praying at the Al Aksa Mosque. Mrs Sadat was eager to relate her husband's reactions to his "trip for peace."

"The children gathered around their father as we plied him with questions like 'What did he tell Moshe Dayan? What is Golda Meir like? What was the reaction of the people?' He showed them the letters, drawings of olive branches and flowers they had presented to him by the Israeli children.

"It was so moving to hear him talk about his welcome," she enthused. "Children are innocent, like angels. No one forces them to do something they don't really feel.

"We wanted the details and as my husband talked, we could feel the warmth of Israel's welcome ... . But we wanted to know more and more and he told us. You can imagine how impressed he was with the Israelis and their understanding of his trip and its risks. Even now, he is still optimistic and he still has good feelings for Mr. Begin and the Israelis.

"You know, when my husband talks about peace, he also acts on pursuing it. He is doing his best to find the solution. Maybe Mr. Begin is right when he speaks of what happened before, but let us look to the future. We want our grandchildren and Mrs. Begin's grandchildren and everyone's grandchildren to grow up in peace instead of living with the threat of war."

She added that she was only l7 years old when she married him, and thought then that his best quality was his honesty, "and in the 25 years of our marriage, he has not changed. He is courageous and tries to do what is good for everyone. He wants to help, not only his own people, but others as well and, in his positioon, he really can help."

It was l6 months after Sadat's momentous sojourn (to Jerusalem) when he and Mr. Begin signed the first Arab-Israeli Peace Treaty, which resulted in the return of the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, ending the threat of war between the two major protagonists.

A beaming President Jimmy Carter, who played midwife to that l979 Accord, hosted the signing ceremony athe White House. For their efforts in pursuit of peace, President Sadat and Prime Minister Begin were awarded the Nobel Peace prize. (President Carter received his Nobel Peace prize in Oslo in December, 2002, A year later ???????????? President Carter honored President and Mrs Sadat with a White House State Dinner and noted, in his toast, that Sadat's trip to Jerusalem "transformed the attitude" of the world.

"A shock went through society in almost every nation that one person could instantly change a discouraging and even debilitating deadlock that had caused four wars since l948," Carter declared. "So much has changed from the time when Israel was hated by almost all Arab governments; when no Arab leader had the temerity to even meet with, or talk to, or recognize diplomatically or acknowledge the right of Israel to exist, and President Sadat changed all that."

Two months before his death, I asked President Sadat — during our last interview at Blair House, how he wanted to be remembered. "For my efforts to bring peace, and as one who lived for peace, and would die for peace," he replied. "Nothing ranks higher, and I will go to lengths to achieve it. I like the challenge and where there is a challenge, you will find me in high spirits."

And if he were granted three wishes, what would Sadat want? Leaning forward, puffing on his ever present pipe, he responded: One, peace in the Middle East; two, peace in the Middle East; three, peace in the Middle East. These are my three wishes and I will pray for them until my last moment before I die."

While Sadat did not achieve the comprehensive Arab-Israel peace he had sought, [[[CHECK he did help to end ??? ]]] the risk of war and demonstrate that strong statesmanship and leadership as well as competence can make a difference.

On the 30th anniversary of Sadat's "sacred mission" — his wishes for a comprehensive peace not yet realized — it is now incumbent on Mideastern officials to reflect on and enhance Sadat's legacy, exercise diplomatic muscle and finally decide how to summon the courage, fortitude, passion and drive to emulate Sadat's audacious risk for total peace.

Ironing out a solution for a comprehensive peace settlement will not come from international bodies alone, but rather from extraordinary and visionary statesmen — eager to play a pivotal role in meeting this momentous challenge.

Sadat, in one of several private interviews granted to me — before and after his heroic trip — disclosed that he originally thought of inviting the five Big Powers of the U.N. (the U.S., China, France, Great Britain and the then Soviet Union) to go with him to Jerusalem so he could give every guarantee possible to Israel.

"At that time," he recalled, "I expected to tell Israel, 'here are the five big powers — whatever guarantees you need, I am ready to fulfill.

"But one reason I revised my thinking and did not take them with me was because Israel always asked for direct negotiations and I thought if I brought the Big Five, it might be construed that I was trying to hide behind them. So I went by myself, to deal face to face, and tell the Israelis, 'Let's bring down the barriers of suspicion.'"

Sadat's visit also provoked antagonism. He noted that most of the Arab world "called me a charlatan' for visiting Jerusalem and Yad Vashem, a memorial to a holocaust many dismissed as propaganda.

"But," he told me, "I purposely went to that awesome place to prove I am serious about peace. For sure, the alternative is horrible. I never thought what had happened during World War II was that terrible. I thought it was mere propaganda. But at Yad Vashem, I saw the documentation and depictions and exhibits and I was really moved. With my own eyes, I saw that memorial that embodies the suffering of Israels and Jews all over the world. They are victims not only of war, but of politics and hatred."

Sadat showed a sensitivity to Israel's security problems on the West Bank. Nonetheless, he said he felt that during negotiations, Israeli leaders might be using the security issue as a pretext for holding on to captured lands. "I am ready to go to whatever ends are needed for Israel's right to be secure," he said. "But no one should trespass on the sovereignty or the land of others."

While Sadat's motivation in going to Jerusalem was a combination of virtue and vision, that which really gave life to the idea was a handwritten letter to him — a few weeks earlier — from Carter. The letter included a survey of the region's situation and described the psychological complexities that separated the parties.

Noting that 70 percent of the obstacles were psychological and 30 percent substance, Sadat added that it would take only a few days for an agreement "if the spirit of my initiative" would prevail.

"My initiative was built on love," Sadat stressed. "Even if it were my last act as president, I would be happy that I took the initiative because my visit made a difference and has changed the world." Sadat pointed out that the Middle East is the most

explosive area in the world. "You know, before I met Mr. Begin, I studied him by reading articles about him as well as some of his own writings," he recalled. "I studied his strengths and weaknesses as a boxer studies his opponent. After I was convinced that he was earnest about peace and strong enough to make concessions to achieve peace I went to Israel.

"For sure, I soon realized that Mr. Begin was a man with whom understanding could be reached. I saw in him a serious man, able to get his people to accept his decisions, and I saw positiveness in him and his government."

Prime Minister Begin, in an interview in l982, told me that if Sadat were still alive relations between their countries would gradually have been improved.

"If Sadat were still ruling Egypt, I think that, through education, he would make sure that the hatred of Israelis is omitted from school text books," Mr. Begin said. "He would instruct teachers to teach their pupils about acceptance and tolerance. The decades of animosity and of evil need to end. It may take more time to uproot the hatred and to install understanding and cooperation ... . I think that will come some day, but not in my lifetime.

"You know, Begin continued, "thousands of Israelis are visiting Egypt, but very few Egyptians visit Israel. There is a daily bus, but it returns empty. I would like to see open borders between Israel and our neighbors. I hope someday people are able to drive back and forth over the Israeli borders like they do between the U.S and Canada."

President Ronald Reagan, recalling Sadat's mission, told me in a 1981 Oval Office interview, "The answer to Israel's security must lie in actions similar to those taken beween Israel and Egypt after that mission.

"Our idea now is to persuade Jordan's King Hussein and other Arab leaders to follow Sadat's lead to where they and Israel can live in the area, feeling secure, each one in his own borders, with no fear of military invasion or attack by any country."

He added that "down deep" each of the leaders in the Mideast wants the same thing — a peaceful solution to their problems.

'So I believe they should try harder among themselves to work out a genuine coexistence, and then, if they need the United States, I will go for broke to make it happen."

Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State Gen. Alexander M. Haig, Jr,, describes Sadat as a remarkable Arab leader and credits him with a "unique strategic brilliance' which enabled him to sort out contradictions between Soviet imperalism, traditional Arab nationalism and anti Zionism (then the three forces pressing on Egypt).

Gen. Haig also told me: "It was Sadat's world view — in contrast to what appeared to him at that time — as American naivete about the Soviet threat to the Mideast and Africa, that, in my view, triggered his historical trip to Israel that in turn made Camp David possible."

And it was former President Bill Clinton who emphasized that the U.S. would continue to "stand with those who seek peace, with those who stand up for change in the face of terrorists and extremists who seek to destroy the peace by killing the innocent.

"They cannot, they must not, they will not succeed. They are the past. The peace makers are the future."

Indeed, the future now lies with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Abu Mazen.

And when the top leaders draft their own "road map" and the time is ripe for America's President George W. Bush, he has an opportunity to go down in history as the one who finally helps to make the difference in the region's landscape.

George W. Bush, who was a mere 22 months old when the state of Israel was born in l948, even early in his presidency was not known as a long-time student of the Mideast. Nonetheless he has a good heart, a sensitive soul and a keen mind and his certitude and determination are solid. He became aware of the frustrations and problems of the troubled region. And now his desire is to assure the Israelis of their security as well as lighten the plight of the Arabs.

In an Oval Office interview in July 2004 President Bush was both philosophical and confident as he answered my questions about the powder keg that still is the Mideast and emphasized his hope for a two-state solution.

"My vision is for a free and democratic Iraq and a free and peaceful democratic Palestinian state serving as catalysts for change in a region that has harbored resentment," he told me. "The Middle East has also served as a place to recruit terrorists who have a desire to kill Americans, to drive us out of parts of the world so they can impose their will."

He added that there had been difficulties in carrying on the policy in Iraq. At the outset of the war the Bush administration had stated that the road to Jerusalem led through Baghdad. Since then, progress towards a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue and the restoration of peace and order in Iraq have proven tough challenges.

He said, however, that he has no regrets over America's role in Iraq, or his own leadership of it and that he is not troubled by the severe criticism he is receiving.

"I say to those critics that I am the first American president to have stood up in front of the world — at the United Nations — and call for the creation of a Palestinian state that would live in peace side by side with Israel. I see the emergence of a Palestinian state ... we're working toward the day when two states — Israel and Palestine — live peacefully within secure and recognized borders as called for by the Security Council resolution. We will do all in our power to bring those parties back into negotiations. But peace will only come when all have sworn off — forever — violence and terror."

The president believes that with the emergence of an independent Palestinian state, the West Bank and Gaza will be governed by Palestinians and that the final border is up for negotiations between the two parties. He does not agree with his critics that the friction between Israel and her neighbors is connected to, or intertwined with, his policy in Iraq.

"The problem with the Palestinians is territory," he said. "They don't have a state to call their own and they don't have leadership. I think that those Palestinians who want a change ought to ask for help to build the security apparatus." As recently as Nov. 7th, President Bush again called for a two-state solution. The setting was George Washington's Mount Vernon estate and gardens where he had hosted France's President Nicolas Sarkozy on a tour. Afterwards the two presidents held a press conference, during which Bush was asked how he felt about France's engaging Syria on the upcoming Lebanese elections.

His reply: "First of all, the Syrian influence in Lebanon was something the previous government and I worked on to — collaboratively.

And because France and the United States worked together, we passed the 1551 Resolution ouf of the United Nations, which got Syria out of Lebanon, by and large. And so we spent time collaborating on how best to make sure that Syria doesn't influence the presidential elections; that, in fact, the presidency is picked by the Lebanese people.

"And I'm very aware that Mr. Hariri and Nabih Berri are in consultations as to whether or not they can come up with an acceptable candidate to them, not to Syria; whether or not the Lebanese people can be assured that their President is going to be representing the people of Lebanon, not the people — not the government of Syria.

"And I'm comfortable with President Sarkozy's government sending clear messages that meet common objectives, and our common objective here is for this Lebanese democracy to survive, thrive and serve as an example for others.

"We will work with France and others to see that this process be completed by Nov. 24th. We believe it's in the interests of the Middle East that this Lebanese democracy survive. I want Lebanon to serve as an example for the Palestinians, to show them what's possible. I believe in a two-state solution. I believe there ought to be two states living side by side in peace. So does President Sarkozy. We discussed that today. There's nothing better for the Palestiniana to see what is possible with a stable democracy in Lebanon.

"... Isn't it interesting that the places where there is [[CHECK]] most violence is where there are young democracies trying to take hold, whether it be Iraq or Lebanon or in the Palestinian Territories? And the call for nations such as ourselves is to support those who want to live in freedom. Freedom is the great alternative to the ideology of people who murder the innocent to achieve their political objectives — by the way, the very same ones that came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.

"And so what I'm telling you is that I have a partner in peace; somebody who has clear vistion, basic values, who is willing to take tough positions to achieve peace. And when you ask, am I comfortable with the Sarkozy government sending messages — you bet I'm comfortable."

French or American, British or Russian, Arab or Israeli, Italian or Chinese, a place in global history is awaiting the statesman with the courage, insistency, assertiveness of Sadat 30 years ago and to make that kind of strategic thinking a reality.

The 30th anniversary of his brave initiative in Jerusalem is a propitious time for recalling his final wishes and pledging to fulfill them.

Yes, Anwar Sadat, I can now reply to you. There is a key to that peace which you sought and died for. But your efforts and sacrifices are not in vain. You remain the exemplary model — even today, 30 years later. The impact you made on me is still with me.

After more than 40 years of intensely following Mideast issues here and abroad and copious private conversations and interviews with the high and mighty as well as with the powerless and poor, I can attest to the facts that those who have the power and authority to help realize your "initiatives" and ingenuity and perspicacity and bravery have been and are in denial with their moral authority enabling the heirs of terrorists who had shortened yours and others' lives. They continue their vicious desire to kill your heartfelt vision for peace.

However I'm confident that perseverence, determination and strategic thinking will turn the key to what you so nobly sought that will unlock the way to that permanent peace.

I was struck then and still am by the sincerity, honesty and audacity of your purpose and vividly recall your fond musings about your talks in Jerusalem. That memory has never dimmed nor has the impact of our in-depth one-on-one conversations and on-and-off-the-record talks we had before your death.

During his vice presidency and presidency, Gerald R.Ford also attempted to expedite peace talks with officials. He noted, however, that serious infighting and bickering from even senior officials, appointed and non appointed, as well as ambassadors, had a mjaor effect on negotiatiofns or any meetings.

He told me how one undermines the other, who is placed in any job. from the lowest to the highest position which, in turn, affects the judgment of any leader's decisions.

"That's why both lower and senior staffs need to be carefully vetted or screened before they are hired in any organization, whether it be in private sector or the White House."

He noted that, particulalarly in the White House, the president — not aides — should make the decisions.

He noted that the president — not aides — should make the decisions about whom to see, when and why. "The temptation to exceed one's authority becomes irresistible," he said, "and in their eagerness to be close to the president, most aides tell him only what they think he wants to hear."

Mr. Ford believes that White House or State Department staff should not necessarily be selected from those “cliques of ambitious amateurs” who work in presidential campaigns; and that aides would be more effective in carrying out the president's programs and the people's business if they are competent, accountable and do not focus on their own agendas.

He still maintains that he was too tolerant and too reluctant to fire anyone. "In the final months of my presidency," he laments, "I began to face the problem, but it was too late."

He said that he concurs with one of President Lyndon B. Johnson's press secretaries, George E. Reedy, who wrote in the 'Twilight of the Presidency' that "Presidents should not hire assistants under 40 years old, who had not suffered any major disappointments. When amateurs find themselves in the West Wing or the East Wing of the White House, they begin to think they are little tin gods . . .' "

In his autobiography, 'A Time To Heal,' Gerald Ford writes: "Reedy left the White House staff several years before, but he was predicting the climate that had led to Watergate, and that is disturbing."

Mr. Ford also writes that throughout his political career, nothing upset him more than the bickering among members of his staff. "It was time-consuming, terribly distracting and unnecessary," he notes. "I told my aides I would not tolerate that infighting. But it continued, even accelerated, in the White House."

Sadat described his Knesset address as the "most memorable moment of his trip 30 years ago where he had emphasized that he had come with "firm steps, to build a new life and establish permanent peace."

Who will be the next Sadat?

Where is today's Anwar Sadat who can electrify, who can resurrect the possibilities, wake us all up and then soar over the hurdles of entrenched hatred and insecurities, going beyond misjudgments of the past. Who can choose the peacemakers and elevate them above petty minds and bitter hearts? Who has the stature, who can be empowered to lift our sights, a healer, brave enough to attack the challenge anew? People around the world yearn for action. Above all, who will now turn the correct key to unlock the door to the kind of concrete action plan that energized Sadat. He willed himself to take the risks and so built the moral authority to make the leadership strides to the peace table on which coexistence can be made a reality.

As of now the ones who have the power, the correct strategic key to turn or unlock are killed before they can turn it, either by undermining one another or by character assassination that one endures who has that key.

Therefore nothing is acted upon with moral authority and assertion to end any deadlock. Instead the status quo remains and the ramifications of those who might have the correct key are undermined and bashed and become victims of the politics of personal destruction — even killed, even murdered. Yet no one shows sympathy or empathy with Sadat's action or had the human insight needed to help him achieve that noble goal. Instead he was murdered by his own people in his own country.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As Secretary of State, Gen. Colin L. Powell was asked — at a briefing — how he would fight global terrorism with international coalitions.

"....The enemy is in many places," he replied. "The enemy is not looking to be found. The enemy is hidden, The enemy is very often right here within our own country ....

And so you have to design a campaign plan that goes after that kind of enemy, and it is not always blunt force military, altho that is certainly an option. it may well be that the diiplomatic efforts, political efforts, legal, financial, other efforts, may be just as effective against that kind of an enemy as would be military force.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Evil and wicked zealotry is not a new phenomenon. The fanatic mentality is one of the saddest obstacles in the world's pathway to eventual co existence and the loving kindness that goes with peace. Our priority now must be to expose the twisted, perverted and abusive behavior and thoughts, ideas, even jealosusies, of those people and nations the world over who have learned to employ — overtly and covertly — virulence, violence and the tools of threat, torture, deception and shrewd manipulation to seek their own objectives and agendas.

Short of achieving such goals, neither the Mideast nor any other region will be able to move toward Sadat's vision of peace based on his concept of a diplomacy of love, a diplomacy he attempted in his dealings with Israel.

There is, "for sure" (Sadat's expression) a key to peace in the Mideast.

The question is: Which statesman will use the right key to open the right door which discards the hatred and animosity and suspicion and turn make real the concept of the Golden Rule and Ten Commandments — treat your neighbor as you want him to treat you. That key could be used for every lock or door or person or nation.

As Sadat said: "We need to turn the hatred into love and compassion ... with compassion ... with communication and quiet diplomacy. Even great institutions can be paralyzed by petty bickering or grand disagreements. Foreign ministries, State Departments need to be clear about what's needed. Most of all, they need leadership, the kind that clarifies, motivates and decides.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On Mideast issues, Ms. Feldman has interviewed every Israeli prime minister, including the first, David Ben Gurion and every American president from Lyndon Johnson through George W. Bush (including Harry Truman, in his post presidential years (l968, l97l, l972)