Madrid 1991

The Madrid Conference of 1991 stands as a critical juncture in the efforts to find a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Held from October 30 to November 1 in Madrid, Spain, the conference was an attempt to bring together various parties to the conflict to negotiate a peace process. This article delves into the background, the conduct, results, reception, and the legacy of this pivotal conference.

The idea for an international peace conference for the Middle East had been circulating for years. The end of the Cold War and the Gulf War shifted geopolitical alignments, creating a new atmosphere for potential diplomatic breakthroughs. The United States and the Soviet Union, no longer staunch adversaries, were now in a position to collaborate in pressing for peace in the region.

One particular condition precedent for the conference was the revocation of the UN Resolution 3379.

UN Resolution 3379, passed in 1975, declared that “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” The resolution was highly controversial and was a significant impediment to peace negotiations, with Israel and its allies, particularly the United States, vehemently opposing it. Its revocation became a non-negotiable condition for Israel to participate in any peace conference. In December 1991, shortly after the Madrid Conference, the UN General Assembly repealed this resolution with Resolution 46/86.

The Madrid Conference, co-sponsored by the US and the Soviet Union, was unprecedented in bringing together Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and the Palestinians for direct negotiations. While the Palestinians didn’t have official representation separate from Jordan due to US and Israeli objections to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) participating, they were still included as part of a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation.

Several proposals were put forward during the conference. Notably, discussions revolved around Israel’s withdrawal from the territories it occupied in the 1967 war, the concept of “land for peace”, and the rights and status of Palestinian refugees.

While the conference itself did not produce any immediate breakthroughs, it set the stage for subsequent bilateral negotiations. This was the first time that all parties sat together for peace talks, and while it exposed the wide gaps in their respective positions, it also highlighted areas of potential agreement. The conference led to a series of follow-on negotiations, including the Washington talks.

The conference received mixed reactions. Many saw it as a genuine step forward, recognizing the significance of having all parties at the negotiation table. Critics, however, argued that without substantive progress and with the absence of the PLO as a separate entity, the talks were more symbolic than effective.

The true legacy of the Madrid Conference lies in the diplomatic processes it initiated. The talks paved the way for the Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO, signed in 1993 and 1995, which established the Palestinian Authority and laid the groundwork for further negotiations.

While the Madrid Conference didn’t lead to an immediate resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, it marked a paradigm shift in how the international community approached peace in the Middle East. By providing a platform for direct dialogue, it set in motion a series of events that would shape the region’s diplomacy for years to come.