When the United States wanted longtime enemies Egypt and Israel to make peace in the late 1970s, it urged them to meet face-to-face. Anwar Sadat, president of Egypt and Menachem Begin, premier of Israel, finally did meet and agreed to the Camp David Accords in 1979. Since then, there have been no wars between the two nations.
Recently, President Bush hinted strongly that Israel should meet with the Palestinian Authority. Like other recent presidents, he appears to view direct negotiations as the best way to resolve the differences the two sides have about a range of issues from the construction of settlements to refugees.
But when challenged by one of its own enemies, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, to meet directly to discuss disagreements, the Bush Administration flatly rejected the idea. Why is negotiating "in" for other nations and "out" for us?
President Bush should meet directly with Hussein. This meeting could improve the situation in a number of ways.
First, it would serve to make clear that the United States practices what it preaches. It would strengthen our nation's hand in attempting to mediate disputes between or among other nations.
Second, it would reiterate what should be President Bush's position that war should only be a last resort. If we show restraint, we will impress upon other nations the need to show restraint in their conflicts with other nations.
Lastly, it could even resolve the dispute the United States has with Iraq. Though this possibility appears to be a long-shot given Bush's war rhetoric, time is running out on our chance to make peace and we should take it while we can.
President Bush has nothing to lose by debating issues with Saddam Hussein. If Bush doesn't feel up to going himself, he can delegate the job to Vice-President Cheney. Either way, the United States owes it to its people and to the world to make an appearance.