Ambassador Dennis Ross Discusses Mideast

This past Tuesday, Mar. 12 members of the College and Middlebury community gathered in Mead Chapel to hear Dennis Ross, Washington’s ambassador to Israel under the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations, discuss “Israel, the Peace Process, and the Arab Awakening.” Ross gave a nuanced account of the current conflicts in the Middle East, the repercussions of continued polarizing interactions among the parties involved and the practical steps these parties, including the United States, might take toward peace.

This talk continues the College community’s on-going discussion of the political and humanitarian circumstances unfolding in the Middle East and the role of the United States as a third-party actor. Last year, Daniel Kurtzer, U.S. ambassador to Egypt under the Clinton administration, spoke about Israel and its developing leadership role in the Middle East.

Ross Speaks to Specific Conflicts

After an introduction by Pardon Tillinghast Professor of Religion Larry Yarbrough and Sarah Cohen ’15, Hillel’s Israel chair, Ross took to the lectern. He began with a brief overview of the 2011 Arab Spring and the Arab Awakening that has followed. This provided a contextual basis for the rest of his discussion, which was grounded specifically in the most recent situations unfolding in Egypt, Syria, Iran and Israel/Palestine. For each state, Ross gave a brief overview of its current political and socioeconomic circumstances and then discussed what the U.S. can and should do to promote peace within the context of these circumstances.

Ross first explained that current leadership under Egypt’s elected party-in-power, the Muslim Brotherhood, has yet to yield a real positive political transformation. He went on to say that the United States should take advantage of Egypt’s heavy reliance on international support to negotiate in favor of the ideological principles it believes will promote a necessary shift toward democracy and stability. Ross described it as “principle for us, practicality for them [Egypt].” One of the most important terms Ross noted was that the Muslim Brotherhood needs to make room for political pluralism, not only for the purposes of upholding the principles on which they were elected, but so as not to cement an opposition that cannot exist within the political system.

Ross then moved on to discuss the violent conflict in Syria, throwing out explicit numbers to contextualize what he termed a “catastrophe”: 70,000 dead, one million registered refugees and two to three million estimated internally displaced people. He explained that this was not only a Syrian issue, but that the devastation has the potential to destabilize the whole region.

“Las Vegas rules don’t apply to Syria,” Ross said. “What happens in Syria won’t just [stay] in Syria.”

Ross emphasized that while the U.S. government has no desire to get dragged into the quagmire, “there comes a time when the cost of inaction greatly outweighs the cost of action.”

A practical concern is how can the U.S. invest in the situation productively. Ross explained that while there is hesitation to provide arms to the opposition, there are a variety of ways that the United States can increase accountability in the allocation and use of its resources.

The talk then turned to the United States’ stance on Iran’s nuclear program. According to Ross, President of the United States Barack Obama has assumed the position of prevention rather than containment.

“Prevention means that Iran acquiring nuclear capability is so dangerous, so likely to produce a nuclear arms race in the Middle East … that we must prevent this from happening,” said Ross.

Ross believes that the future of relations with Iran will be decided in 2013, meaning the U.S. will either find a diplomatic means of addressing the situation or will resort to using force.

The rest of Ross’s talk focused on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, which he was in a position to directly influence during his time as ambassador. His discussion focused on steps that both the Palestinians and Israelis could take to change the mindset of “disbelief,” which has overcome the populations of both countries, whose “vast majority, 70 to 75 percent,” according to Ross, support a two-state solution.

In an expanded version of his op-ed, titled “To Achieve Mideast Peace, Suspend Disbelief,” published in the Mar. 2 edition of the New York Times, Ross outlined a 14-point plan of action to replace the current “dialogue of the deaf,” and enact a psychological shift that will allow for productive negotiations regarding final-status issues to occur.

Ross then held a brief Q&A where audience members engaged with his discussion, asking pointed questions regarding the rationale, practicality and comprehensiveness of his suggestions. The conversation then continued at a post-talk reception in McCullough Social Space.

Organizers, Attendees React

While the Office of the President and Rohatyn Center for Global Studies co-sponsored the talk, the initiative to bring Ross to speak came from Cohen, who was also behind last year’s Kurtzer lecture. She explained that Ross and Kurtzer, with their years of first-hand experience in dealing with the Middle East, satisfy the need for nuanced and educated discussion surrounding these complex issues.

“These issues are so complicated and they can’t be summed up in a buzz word,” said Cohen. “Dennis Ross has been a part of this conversation for 30 years and he really knows the ins and outs of everything that’s happened, every peace treaty, all the history. If Middlebury students really want to understand the conflict and make an informed opinion on it, these are the kinds of people that need to come.”

“I thought it was important to have somebody who has been involved in negotiations, who would actually have first-hand experience, who is a Washington insider who can shed light not just simply on the Middle East but really the position of the U.S. versus the different spots in the Middle East,” said Director of the Rohatyn Center and Professor of Geography Tamar Mayer.

Reactions to Ross’s talk were generally positive; students and staff cited his realism, pragmatism and knowledge as valuable additions to the at-times fractured discussions on campus surrounding the Middle East.

“I think having Ambassador Ross on campus provided a context for discussion on Israel that we don’t normally hear and I think he provided a baseline for informed conversation that I’m sure will continue on the campus,” said Associate Chaplain Rabbi Ira Schiffer, Hillel’s adviser.

Some felt, however, that while his arguments for better future diplomatic interactions between parties were both thought out and grounded in reality, he overlooked the practical aspects of application.

“I think what he had to say was a good way to outline how both sides really need to comply with regulations before we can make any substantial progress,” said Abra Atwood ’14.5. “He didn’t give a point for how to jump start something like this … [therefore] we’ll still continue arguing over similar issues because we have nowhere to start.

“[Ross] provided a number of eloquent and well put-together points and solutions for the region; only time will tell whether his vision is realistic as well,” Zack Abdu-Glass ’13 wrote in an email.