Itamar Rabinovich, co-author of Israel in the Middle East: Documents and Readings on Society, Politics, And Foreign Relations, Pre-1948 to the Present with University President Jehuda Reinharz, discussed the disparities between American presidents and Israeli prime ministers in negotiating the Arab-Israeli conflict last Wednesday.Rabinovich was Israel's chief negotiator with Syria under former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and from 1993 to 1996 served as Ambassador to Israel in Washington. He is currently a visiting Professor of Public Policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

Rabinovich began with a succinct history of the Arab-Israeli peace process through American presidential administrations, beginning with the Nixon administration's efforts after the Yom Kippur War and ending in the present day.

The problem with American presidents mediating the peace process, Rabinovich said, is the "discontinuity between the presidential administrations." He described how each president, in an effort not to emulate his predecessor, tries to take a drastically different policy track than before, which often results in failure to implement their own policies.

He explained how the failure of Kissinger's "piece for peace" policy-when Israel gave up the land it acquired during the Yom Kippur War of 1973 against Syria and Egypt in exchange for a peace treaty-fueled Jimmy Carter's desire to simply define borders of a Palestinian state. President George Bush, in an effort to remove himself from any similar policies to Former President Bill Clinton's, took a more passive role in Arab-Israeli peace negotiations than his predecessor. Had Carter and Bush continued the policies of their predecessors, Rabinovich explained, there could have been a legitimate peace process.

This problem of discontinuity between predecessors and current leaders is also present in the Israeli government. When the right wing of the Israeli government replaces the left wing and vice versa, "very different policies are carried out," Rabinovich said.

He cited how Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak's left-wing ideology for peace led to Ariel Sharon, his political opposite, gaining the title of prime minister. Rabinovich also emphasized the fact that Israeli prime ministers often feel they have to choose between domestic or foreign policy achievements, since they typically serve for shorter lengths of time than American presidents, which makes it hard for them to achieve significant accomplishments on both fronts.

Rabinovich said a major problem that hinders communication between Israeli prime ministers and American presidents is that election cycles in America and Israel don't often coincide, so the two leaders cannot develop a relationship with one another throughout their terms.

He said spring 2009 will be "unusual." It is the beginning of the United States presidential cycle, and, due to Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's resignation, a long-term Israeli prime minister will likely have been determined. Both leaders-even if Tzipi Livni, the current acting prime minister, retains her position, will be new in their roles, giving the peace process a fresh start.

Sometime in March 2009, Rabinovich said, "the Israeli prime minister will come to Washington to meet with the U.S. president about the peace process," which he thinks will be pivotal to the process success. He said direct negotiations are necessary for making peace.

Ron Kendler '09, who attended the event, said, "[Rabinovich's] forecast for this March was particularly insightful. I will have my eyes open this spring." Kendler expressed dismay that there was not enough publicity about the event and said he wished more students had known about it.