Bill Clinton Einladung Camp David 2000

Am 05. Juli 2000 gab Präsident Bill Clinton in einer Pressekonferenz bekannt,
den israelischen Premierminister Ehud Barak und Palästinenserpräsident
Yassir Arafat zu Friedensverhandlungen nach Camp David eingeladen zu haben:

 THE WHITE HOUSE

                     Office of the Press Secretary

       _________________________________________________________

       For Immediate Release                      July 5, 2000

                       STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

                 ON ANNOUNCEMENT OF CAMP DAVID SUMMIT

                  WITH PRIME MINISTER BARAK OF ISRAEL

           AND CHAIRMAN ARAFAT OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY

                 The James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

10:55 A.M. EDT

          THE PRESIDENT:  Good morning.  Early next week, Prime Minister

Barak and Chairman Arafat will come to Camp David at my invitation.  A few

days before that, their negotiators will arrive to help pave the way for

this summit.  The objective is to reach an agreement on the core issues

that have fueled a half-century of conflict between Israelis and

Palestinians.

          After lengthy discussion with the two leaders, and after

listening to Secretary Albright's report, I have concluded that this is the

best way -- indeed, it is the only way -- to move forward.

          To state the task is to suggest the magnitude of the challenge.

Behind the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lie the most profound questions,

about beliefs, political identity, collective fate.  Etched in each side's

mind are intense fears and emotions and a deep-seated commitment to defend

their people's interests.  There are no easy answers, and certainly no

painless ones.  And, therefore, there is clearly no guarantee of success.

          Why this summit and why now?  While Israeli and Palestinian

negotiators have made real progress, crystallizing issues and defining

gaps, the truth is they can take the talks no further at their level.

Significant differences remain, and they involve the most complex and most

sensitive of questions.  The negotiators have reached an impasse.  Movement

now depends on historic decisions that only the two leaders can make.

          I will be there with them and I intend to do all I can to help

them in this endeavor.  But to delay this gathering, to remain stalled, is

simply no longer an option.  For the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as all

of us has seen, knows no status quo.  It can move forward toward real

peace, or it can slide back into turmoil.  It will not stand still.  If the

parties do not seize this moment, if they cannot make progress now, there

will be more hostility and more bitterness, perhaps even more violence.

          And to what end?  Eventually, after more bloodshed and tears,

they will have to come back to the negotiating table.  They will have to

return to face the same history, the same geography, the same demographic

trends, the same passions and the same hatreds -- and I am sure, the exact

same choices that confront them here and now.

          Of course, action does have its perils.  But so, too, does

inaction.  The decisions will not come easier with time.  Fundamentally,

that is what I have concluded.  The leaders have to make the decisions that

are still there to be made, and the longer we wait, the more difficult the

decisions are likely to become.  The Israeli and the Palestinian people

have leaders now who are visionary enough, courageous enough, capable of

building a fair, just and lasting peace.

          In coming here and accepting this challenge, Prime Minister Barak

and Chairman Arafat have shown they are ready to take risks to pursue

peace.  The rest of the world -- and especially the rest of the region --

cannot afford to be bystanders.  For all those who are truly committed to

the cause of peace and to the well-being of the Israeli and Palestinian

people, now is the time to lend their support to the peacemakers.

          To the people of Israel and to the Palestinian people, I would

like to say this:  Peace under circumstances like these is never cost-free.

Neither side can achieve 100 percent of its goals.  For the optimal

solution of each party is, by definition, one the other party cannot and

will not accept.  Negotiations, therefore, must create an outcome that is

realistic, balanced and fair, and that meets the fundamental objectives of

both sides; an outcome that strengthens the two parties rather than weakens

one of them; an outcome that accommodates both sides' vital needs and

dreams; an outcome that reconciles their competing grievances.

          That is the only outcome that will permit Israelis and

Palestinians to offer their children a future far different from the past,

one with more opportunity and less fear, more hope and less despair.  And

that, of course, is the ultimate prize of peace.

          The objective is often overshadowed, I might say, as all of you

know, by the abject dreariness of the pursuit -- one that you will, no

doubt, have occasion to comment on in the days ahead.  The ups and downs of

the process, the daily hassles and disputes, the open-ended nature of the

negotiations -- all these, over time, have blurred the vision of what it is

we are trying to achieve.

          For Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat, the challenge next

week will be to start drawing the contours of the long-awaited peace -- a

peace that can fulfill the Israeli people's quest for security, for

recognition, for genuine reconciliation with Palestinians and genuine

acceptance in the region -- acceptance in deeds as well as words.  A peace

that can fulfill the Palestinian people's legitimate aspirations to

determine their destiny on their own land, and to build a better future.

          Almost seven years ago now, we witnessed the historic handshake

between the late Prime Minister Rabin and Chairman Arafat.  It began a

process that offered the Israeli and Palestinian people the chance to

achieve what I then described as "the quiet miracle" of a normal life.

That is still the vision that must inspire the efforts and call forth the

commitment, courage and creativity of Prime Minister Barak and Chairman

Arafat next week.

          Q    Mr. President, do you think that this is the last

opportunity for peace during your presidency?  And how long will you give

these negotiations?  Are you talking days, weeks, what?

          THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the answer to the first -- actually, the

short answer to both questions is, I don't know.  I'll tell you what I do

know.  I know that Prime Minister Barak strongly believes that the nature

of this process is such that the final decisions cannot be made except by a

meeting between the two leaders, and that he cannot go further than he has

gone without that sort of meeting.

          Chairman Arafat understands that the nature of the process is

such that the final decisions will have to be made by the two leaders.  And

so they're willing to give it their best shot.  And they understand, too,

that as we have already seen, delay tends to make these things worse, not

better.

          One of the most important judgments any political leader has to

make when dealing with a thorny problem is whether delay will make it

better or worse.  Occasionally, you actually get problems where the best

thing to do right now is nothing, that delay will actually cause them to

become less severe.  These are not such problems.  Delay only seems to me

to make them more severe.  So that's the answer to the first question.

          The second question is, we all know what the deal is.  We know

what the issues are.  We know at least within a range what the options are.

I think if we work hard we can get it done in several days, but I will give

it whatever time is required, as long as we're still moving forward.

          Q    Mr. President, could you describe the extent of your

participation?  Are you going to move up to Camp David, lock, stock and

barrel, for as long as it takes?  And are you going to present a U.S.,

maybe a model plan, that might bring these two sides together?

          THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I think the less I say right now about what

I'm going to do, the better.  And I will spend as much time there as I need

to spend.  I may come back here from time to time, depending on what else

is happening, what else we need to do.  We've got a lot going on in

Congress now, even though they'll be gone a lot -- some of the time,

perhaps.  But I think they'll be here most of the time we'll be here, and I

may have to come back.  So we'll just see.  But I will be there a lot and

I'll work as hard as I need to work.

          Q    What happens if this slips past the deadline in September,

how important is that deadline?

          THE PRESIDENT:  Well, it's a deadline they set for themselves,

and I think they all see it in terms that are -- both sides see it in terms

that are different from the deadline they set for the framework agreement

-- that is, they knew that there were problems inherent in making the

framework agreement that if they could overcome, they could make the final

agreement consistent with the framework agreement.

          So that's one of the things, obviously, that has driven my

decision here.  I think that neither of them really want to see us go by

September without a resolution of this, and I think they understands the

stakes here.

          Q    Mr. President, can you talk about the symbolism of the

location of Camp David, what impact at all it might have on the parties to

help them bridge the difficult gaps between them?

          THE PRESIDENT:  Well, it is a place where, obviously, a milestone

in Middle East peace was reached, and I hope in that sense, I think it has

to be a positive environment.  But I think they also realize that from the

very beginning, these were the hardest questions that go to the core of

both sides' identity and sense of themselves -- far more difficult to

resolve, with all respect, than any issues between Israel and the Egyptians

or the Jordanians, or even the Syrians.  Although we are not there yet with

the Syrians, everybody knows pretty much what the deal is there, and that

there are practical questions there that are not nearly so charged with

emotion and identity, and almost national consciousness as these are.

          So these are the difficult ones.  And obviously I hope that the

setting will help to inspire them and to inspire us.  I hope we'll all be

inspired by it.  But it's also a great place for us to be, because it gives

us a reasonable chance to work in quiet and without interruption, and to

observe the necessary discretion that, without which, we won't be able to

move forward.

          Thank you.

Source: US State Departement
Photo: Wikipedia CC Lizenz