Against the backdrop of U.S. President Trump's March 25, 2019
recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan, and the
40th anniversary of the peace accords between Israel and Egypt, the Arab
press, and especially the Egyptian press, published articles criticizing the
Arabs' and Palestinians' handling of the conflict with Israel. The writers
argued that the "all or nothing" attitude to the conflict, which has
led the Arabs and Palestinians to reject every proposed solution, has
caused a steady erosion in the proposals presented to them, while allowing
Israel to consolidate its control of the occupied territories. They added that
the U.S. recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan proved the wisdom
of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat's decision to make peace with Israel and
thereby regain Sinai, as opposed to the folly of the peace rejectionists, whose
obstinacy has left the Golan and Jerusalem in Israeli hands.
a) Ahmad Al-Tawwab, a columnist for the Egyptian government
daily Al-Ahram, (Mar 25th 2019) criticized the Arabs and
Palestinians for rejecting every proposed solution to the conflict with Israel
out of a misguided belief that, by digging in, they will eventually get the
best possible deal. He wrote: "We must reassess the bizarre belief that
has prevailed for many years among many Arab politicians and intellectuals,
especially Palestinian ones. Opportunities were missed and better alternatives
failed to materialize, each subsequent solution offered was worse than the one
before”
b) Fatah member and former Palestinian Authority (PA) minister Nabil
'Amr made similar statements in his column in the London-based Saudi
daily Al-Sharq
Al-Awsat (Mar 30th 2019). He wrote: "Seven decades
after the Arabs and Palestinians rejected the [1947] Partition Plan, the
question is whether they were right or wrong in doing so. There are different
answers. Those in favor of 'all or nothing' still think that rejecting [the
plan] was the right decision. But those who believe in agreements and in the
principle of 'saving what can be saved' consider this a bitter mistake that led
to losses and no gain. The past is past and talking about it will not change it
c) Egyptian author and journalist Salah Montasser
wrote in his column in the government daily Al-Ahram (April 1st 2019):
"When Anwar Sadat felt, in late 1977, that the effects of the [1973] war
were evaporating, he initiated the peace agreement with Israel. Before making his
historic visit to Jerusalem, he visited Damascus and offered [then-]president
Hafez Assad to join him in making peace, as he had joined him in making war.
But Hafez Assad, as well as [Iraqi president] Saddam [Hussein], [PLO leader
Yasser] Arafat, and [Libyan president Muammar [Qaddafi] attacked Sadat's
[initiative], and he had to choose between appeasing the rejectionist Arabs or
carrying on alone. At the time Egypt was accused of excluding itself from the
Arab-Israeli conflict, and these accusations are still being heard today... as
though the Arabs were doomed to wage endless war and could not seize an
opportunity [to end it], [an opportunity that came] before Israel had built any
settlement
d) Nashwa Al-Hofi, a columnist for Egypt's Al-Watan
daily (Mar 24th 2019), wrote: "Sadat... attained a victory for my
country that restored [its] honor, humiliated Israel and ended its arrogance...
He restored Sinai, whereas the other Arab territories we are currently
demanding have not been restored. He regained the territory thanks to his
foresight... He triumphed over the pen-pushers who do nothing but sit in
air-conditioned offices and reject [every proposal] out of ignorance,
narcissism or lack of vision. He fought calmly and patiently, insisting that
Egypt's flag fly over all of its territory...