The following is an excerpt taken from the new book “American Intifada: Israel, the Gaza War and the new Antisemitism,” by Uri Kaufman. (Republic Book Publishers/Simon & Schuster, April 29, 2025)
* * *
Bill Clinton, George Mitchell, and a Tale of Two Peace Processes
Prime Minister Netanyahu assumed office on June 18, 1996, and immediately set out to do the job the Israeli public elected him to do. When forced to choose, Rabin and Peres always made sure the cart was in front of the horse. First, one had to implement the two-state solution, and then Israel would (hopefully) get security. Under Netanyahu, the cart and the horse were put back into their rightful places. First, Israel had to get security, and then he would implement the two-state solution. In Netanyahu’s words, “One of the key goals in my first term as prime minister was to change the Palestinian perception that ‘terrorism pays’ to ‘terrorism doesn’t pay.’ I did this by insisting on security and reciprocity.”[1]
He was tested almost immediately. On September 24, 1996, Netanyahu gave authorization to unseal the door to a tunnel that ran along the outer rim of Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. The door was nowhere near any mosque and opened into the Christian Quarter of the Old City. But Arafat, a human mushroom cloud, ordered his men to go on the attack using the very guns the Israelis had given them as part of the Oslo Accords, ostensibly to fight terrorism.[2] By the time the mini-war ended, seventeen Israelis and about a hundred Palestinians were dead.[3]
Thousands of wars have been fought since mankind became cognizant of territory and the desire to control it — none were started over a door. Admittedly, this wasn’t just any door, just as the Wailing Wall isn’t just any wall. But for its American and Israeli champions, the peace process was supposed to be the forum for settling disputes, not the battlefield.
Clinton Administration officials blamed Netanyahu.
Cover Design: Jim Villaflores. Republic Book Publishers
They called for a summit where they demanded that Netanyahu make concessions. When he resisted, Clinton went into a dark rage so loud it could be heard in the next room. In the words of Dennis Ross, “Arafat now knew that Bibi was the desperate one.”[4] Violence was thus not only tolerated — it was rewarded.
When a semblance of security was eventually restored, Netanyahu advanced the peace process. He agreed to not one but two interim withdrawals — the Hebron Accords and the Wye River Memorandum — but he steadfastly insisted that progress be conditioned on Arafat fighting terrorism. American officials were outraged. After Netanyahu demanded that Arafat arrest thirteen suspected terrorists, Clinton “exploded,” according to Ross, who wrote bemusedly that he was “struck by [Netanyahu’s] belief that…he was the victim of mistreatment.”[5] On another occasion, Ross writes that the Clinton Administration saw Bibi’s complaints over a bombing as “an excuse to avoid negotiations” and that Bibi was “killing any prospect of peace.”[6]
Meanwhile, the stubborn insistence on that which is most basic in a peace process — namely peace — paid off for ordinary Israelis. During the long, seemingly unending terror campaign that defined the Oslo Peace Process, the lowest loss of life occurred during the premiership of Netanyahu. Only one Israeli died per month on his watch. For Peres, the figures were seven and a half times worse.[7]
President Clinton (R) and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sit on a deck along the banks of the Wye River in Maryland, October 18, 1998. (photo by White House)
The Wye agreement — which required a sizeable withdrawal from West Bank territory by the Israelis — proved Netanyahu’s commitment to the peace process, at least while Israeli buses and pizzerias weren’t being blown to bits. Signed on October 23, 1998, it caused his right-wing coalition partners to bring down the government and trigger early elections.[8] By now, the Israeli public felt safer and, thus, more willing to take chances for peace. On May 17, 1999, Ehud Barak defeated Netanyahu in a historic landslide. At the time, it was the widest margin ever scored by an Israeli challenger over an incumbent.[9]
The Israeli peace camp was jubilant. One left-wing activist said it was as if they had been freed from a foreign occupation.[10] The great obstacle to peace was removed — now they could finalize a deal with the Palestinians. The cart was finally back in front of the horse.
What happened next was probably inevitable. Barak formed his pro-peace government in July; Palestinian terrorists murdered three Israelis in August.[11] Through it all, Washington pressed the Israelis to continue the peace process and all the interim withdrawals that it entailed.[12]
To halt the transfer of territory to the Palestinians and end the talks would “give the terrorists what they wanted.” Israel’s intelligence service issued a classified report in late 1999 predicting that Arafat would go to war because Jerusalem would be blamed for it one way or the other.[13]
* * *
Uri Kaufman is the author of “American Intifada: Israel, the Gaza War and the new Antisemitism.” His work has appeared in Foreign Affairs, Newsweek, The Jerusalem Post, The Independent, and numerous other publications. He lives in Lawrence, New York with his wife and four children.
This excerpt is published by permission from Republic Book Publishers/Simon & Schuster.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
* * *
FOOTNOTES:
[1] See, e.g., The New York Times, February 7, 2023, p. A5; October 26, 2022, p. A4.
[2] The New York Times, December 26, 2021, p. 4.
[3] “Hamas In Its Own Words,” ADL website, January 10, 2024, https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/hamas-its-own-words.
[4] Ambassador Mark A. Green, “Hamas: Words and Deeds…,” The Wilson Center, October 24, 2023, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/hamas-words-and-deeds.
[5] “The Truth Is Hard” brand campaign for New York Times, Droga5, https://droga5.com/work/the-new-york-times-truth-is-worth-it/.
[6] Alessandra Stanley, “A Terrorist, Plain-Spoken and Cold,” The New York Times, April 18, 2010, https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/19/arts/television/19mcveigh.html?searchResultPosition=5.
[7] The New York Times, April 20, 2019, p. D6.
[8] The New York Times, July 23, 2023, p. 8.
[9] Jeremy Scahill et al, “Between the Hammer and the Anvil,” The Intercept, February 28, 2024, https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schwartz-october-7/.
[10] Dionne Searcey, “They Ordered Her to Be a Suicide Bomber. She Had Another Idea,” The New York Times, March 13, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/africa/Nigeria-Boko-Haram-bomber.html.
[11] See, e.g., “U.S. Confirms Yemen Killing of Terrorist,” The New York Times, February 7, 2020, p. A7.
[12] “CNN anchor Amanpour apologizes for calling terror attack on Dee family a ‘shootout,’” The Times of Israel, May 23, 2023, https://www.timesofisrael.com/cnn-anchor-amanpour-apologizes-for-calling-terror-attack-on-dee-family-a-shootout/.
[13] Avnery, Optimi II, p. 64
