William B. Quandt, in Peace Process

The domestic government flummox is rejected because Quandt feels there is "little evidence" that the oil (Arab) or pro-Israeli lobbies argon powerful enough to shape U.S. indemnity systematically for two-and-a-half decades. This leaves the watch of infringe approach, which Quandt endorses. He believes that the ordinaryly consistent policy of the U.S. toward the midst East is due to the changes which occur in the views of the Presidents and their aggrandisement aid as their terms progress. In early(a) words, the differences among the Presidents is sterling(prenominal) at the beginning of their terms. One administration's policy resembles other administrations' policies nearly by the end of the term.

This suggests that there are "basic positions which are adhered to with remarkable tenacity, accounting for the stability in the stated positions of the get together States on the issues in dispute in the Arab-Israeli conflict. They represent a deep consensus" (Quandt 10). The "predispositions" of the Presidents and their aides, along with changes they undergo in office, result in the consistency of "formal positions" taken by the U.S. in the Middle East, although the "tactical judgments" related to policy do change oft (Quandt 422-423).

It is amazing that the general policy of the U.S. has been as consistent as it has indeed been. Aside from the issue of the land won by the Israelis in 19

It would be the height of hypocrisy if Palestinian leaders did not pursue majority rule in light of the fact that "self-determination" is the heart and nous of the Palestinian movement. In any case, "The Palestine Liberation giving medication [still the major entity among the Palestinians], as an actor in world politics could not evade the new global trends of democratization tear down if it wished to." In fact, the PLO "has incorporated these trends in its ideology, structure and strategy" (Hassassian 257).

all the same such definitions emerge, whether through . . . experience or history, . . . wishful view and rationalization, or through group consensus, they will provide guidelines for work on in the face of uncertainty (Quandt 20).

It is clear that the policy of the coupled States has remained consistent in large part because the view of the conflict held by different Presidents and their aides is shaped primarily by the policy which previous presidents held. The policy, in other words, has a animateness of its own. Different tactics may be used, but the general policy remains consistent. This seems to be true in other cases (Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, etc.) where incoming Presidents generally continue the policy of previous administrations, disrespect differences in views held when the Presidents first take office. It is as if the ongoing policy toward the Middle East is a hard mold which shapes the view of the incoming President, resulting in a consistent policy since 1967. The policy of the U.S. toward the Middle East has been consistent in part because the uncertainties of the neighbourhood lead to reliance on policy of past Presidents. Also, Presidents and their aides enter office with a mind-set shaped by past policy:

The fact is that the accords ignorenot succeed at the effectuation stage without the full participation of the Palestinian people and without some measure of faith on the part of the Israelis (and the United States, for that matter) that the Palestinians can create an eff
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.