ESSAYS FOR PEACE

ANWAR SADAT: WARRIOR FOR PEACE

By Andrew Bowen
Severna Park High School

1st Prize Winner

Sadat Essay for Peace Competition
March 2004

President Sadat’s crusade for peace began and ended with a divine determination. The world owes the hope in today’s reality to President Sadat’s fervor. Through battle, war, disengagement agreements, failed shuttle diplomacy, and the ultimate peace, President Sadat forced his people, the Israeli people, and the world to realize that peace is the political reality. When he entered office, Israel occupied the Sinai Peninsula, along with the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and the Gaza Strip. The land-for-peace principle was the only chance to alleviate the acrimony brewed from the occupation. That principle was often discussed, but much stood in the way of making it a political reality. President Sadat was, as President of Egypt and heir of the Pan-Arab leadership, ultimately the man to bring peace. He recognized a way to demolish that divide: accept Israel, ensure its security, and prove to the Arab people that occupied territories were not lost. With purpose and moral clarity, he made history by talking peace with former enemies. He met with the Knesset and stated as clearly as possible his aims. He urged territorial sovereignty and justice. With his leadership, Egypt regained the Sinai, proving that the Arab people were not “a nation reduced to immobility” (Sadat). Likewise, Israel received a guarantee that its Western border with its longtime foe was protected. President Sadat made political realities possible in the late ‘70s that were impossible a decade earlier. He made reality with truth, confrontation, and an ability to break psychological barriers. He gave up his life for that reality, but he gave that reality to the world.

For all its setbacks, there has been a peace process for the last decade. It has had remarkable success. Its continuance, its embrace of realities, and its mere existence are derived from President Sadat’s sacrifice. The Oslo agreements brought four Israeli leaders to direct negotiations with Yasser Arafat. As sensible an idea as direct negotiations are, they did not occur among Israeli and Arab leaders until Sadat made the advance. Furthermore, the Oslo agreements attempted to make the concept of a Palestinian state into a reality. In his speech to the Knesset, Sadat stated creation of a Palestinian state as integral to making lasting peace in the Middle East. Though the state has yet to exist, the concept of its creation is accepted by the Israelis, the U.S., and the U.N. That may seem a small victory, but it is a victory possible only in a world changed by Anwar Sadat. Despite setbacks, the point that the unending pursuit of peace is the necessary state for Israeli-Palestinian and Middle Eastern affairs is in no doubt. An though the notable efforts of Oslo and the U.S.-backed Road Map for peace in the Middle East has been gravely damaged, the world community is not abandoning peace. The Bush Administration, the European Union, and other allies are working on a plan for peace and stability in the “greater Middle East” (Wright and Kessler). The development of this plan after years of disappointment echoes President Sadat’s legacy: that the constant pursuit of peace is the only way to achieve peace. Without the example of the Egyptian-Israeli peace, efforts towards the goal would be unthinkable.

President Sadat articulated the existence of a psychological wall that makes peace untenable, and he took important steps towards eradicating that barrier. However, for peace to be achieved, attempts to make peace must be fortified by the final destruction of the wall. The wall exists among all parties, belligerent and moderating. Of the utmost importance is identifying these barriers and destroying them, piece by piece.

A wall exists between the United States and the Palestinians. For the United States, the wall is built on semantic differences that lead to a mass misunderstanding of the Palestinian people. After September 11, 2001, President Bush made a public differentiation between Islam and Islamic terrorism. This was an important step, as it engaged the citizenry of the United States in understanding the currents that made terrorism possible, while communicating the need for deep understanding and acceptance of the Islamic religion and culture. However, when the Bush Administration made the Road Map public, it made no effort to differentiate between the Palestinian people and Palestinian terrorism. When a country involves itself in peace, its government and people must have a total understanding of the situation’s circumstances. Public misunderstanding breeds violence, and Sadat recognized this. Sadat showed his belief in the equality of the Arab and Israeli people; as Sadat said, “We must all rise above all forms of obsolete theories of superiority, and the most important thing is never to forget that infallibility is the prerogative of God alone.” In order for the United States to make a full effort for moderating successful peace, it must make the differentiation between the Palestinian people and Palestinian terror. Without this effort, the U.S. government gives American people the impression that it should treat the Palestinians less fairly than the Israelis, while giving the Palestinian people the impression that the United States is not on the Palestinian side.

A barrier exists with the U.S. and Israel on one side and the Palestinians on the other. For the U.S. and Israel, this is a barrier built on a distrust of Palestinian leadership. The Road Map essentially removed Yasser Arafat’s position in peace negotiations, while mandating that new political leaders for the Palestinian people be found. However, Yasser Arafat is not irrelevant to the whole of the Palestinian people. If a peace agreement made between the Israelis and Palestinians is made with American aid, that agreement and all negotiations involved must accept certain political realities in order to be accepted as legitimate. An Israeli-Palestinian peace must involve Arafat, Palestinian grassroots organizations and local Palestinian leaders to be accepted as legitimate. A peace based on justice cannot exist any other way.

A barrier exists among too many parties the world over involved in peace, and that is the barrier of “creative ambiguity.” The term “creative ambiguity” is diplomatic jargon referring to diplomatic arrangements that are obscure enough to be interpreted in whatever way any party would like. Commentators have pointed to “creative ambiguity” as one of the reasons for the Oslo process’s failure; some have said that Israeli and Palestinian leaders were not honest with their people about the sacrifices that peace would involve. Sadat came to Israel in November 1977 with “straightforward words and a clear conception with no ambiguity” (Sadat). His intention was a truth vital to peace. Leaders today should follow it to create true peace.

Real peace requires honesty and commitment. With the despair, disappointment, and destruction that have defined Israeli-Palestinian relations in the last few years, leaders have shown at least one remarkable trait: a continuing commitment to peace. Granted, elements integral to the successful peace of Camp David I were lacking in the Oslo process, the Wye River accords, and the Road Map. However, the routes to peace in the Middle East, and in places around the world—Sudan, Ireland, and Haiti, to name a few—are not of the sorts that leaders and citizens must navigate with hope obscured, goals ambiguous. Anwar Sadat identified the problems inherent in peace—distrust, misunderstanding, hopelessness—and pursued peace just as relentlessly as war. To wage a successful war, one finds it imperative to have goals, initiative, and the absolute conviction of a moral purpose; one must be convinced that they are fighting for justice. Anwar Sadat had all of the successful warrior’s mindset when pursuing peace, and he gave the world justice. All the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, citizens, and future generations—along with the leaders, citizens, and future generations of all parties interested in peace—must do is act like Sadat and bring justice.