Series: The Advocates
Episode: 409
Original Link: https://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-4f1mg7fx1c
Episode Summary:
This episode of The Advocates examined whether the United States should press for Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories and simultaneously guarantee Israel's security by treaty. Advocate Lincoln Bloomfield, joined by international affairs experts William Griffith and William Polk, argued that enduring peace in the Middle East requires major Israeli withdrawals linked to firm U.S. security guarantees. They contended this approach is necessary to meet legitimate Arab demands, enable recognition of Palestinian identity, and break the cycle of war—preventing wider conflict, oil embargoes, and superpower escalation. The advocates explained that a formal U.S. guarantee would simply codify an existing de facto commitment and would, if coupled to a negotiated settlement, give all parties—including U.S. allies and the global economy—a stake in stability.
Opposing the proposal, William Rusher and witnesses Edward Luttwak (military strategist) and Uri Ra'anan (international politics professor) warned that such a policy would force Israel to accept indefensible borders in return for a dubious American promise that might trigger direct superpower confrontation and even nuclear war. They argued that credible deterrence and stability are better served by arming Israel to defend itself and by letting Arabs and Israelis negotiate their own borders without imposed solutions or open-ended American military commitments. The critics maintained that American guarantees are strategically and politically unsustainable, would encourage Soviet intervention and Arab intransigence, and risk embroiling the U.S. in repeated and possibly catastrophic military entanglements.
The episode highlighted the broader dilemma of U.S. diplomacy: whether formal guarantees and pressure for territorial compromise can achieve peace—or whether such moves merely risk repeating the tragic errors of past international treaties, endangering both Israel’s survival and regional stability. The audience was invited to consider which approach—active U.S. commitment linked to Israeli withdrawal, or continued support for Israeli self-defense and negotiation—best served U.S. interests, global peace, and justice in the Middle East.
