The Clinton Parameters were the basis of a last-ditch effort by the President to achieve a peace resolution between the Israelis and the Palestinians following the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit. Other factors which compelled Clinton to present these Parameters were the outbreak of the Second Intifada, the upcoming Israeli elections which polls were indicating a defeat for PM Ehud Barak and the impending end of Clinton’s presidency during which he made strenuous efforts to deliver peace but these appeared to be ending in failure.

On 23 December 2000, President Clinton presented the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams with his Parameters, known as the ‘Clinton Peace Plan’, for a final status agreement. He requested that the parties respond to him by 27 December if the Parameters were acceptable as a basis for further negotiations.

President Clinton offered proposals for dealing with the most protracted problems:

– Territory – a Palestinian state comprising between 94–96% of the West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip. Israel would annex the remaining land, which would include Israeli settlements containing 80% of the settler population, mainly in major settlement blocs. Israel would cede 1–3% of land to the Palestinians in land swaps to compensate for the annexations. The Palestinian state would have to be contiguous, and annexed areas along with the number of Palestinians affected would be as minimized as possible.

– Jerusalem – According to the Parameters, Israel would gain sovereignty over the Western Wall. The Palestinians would gain sovereignty and Israel would gain “symbolic ownership” over the rest of the Temple Mount, with both parties sharing sovereignty over the issue of excavations under the Temple Mount. East Jerusalem and the Old City would be divided according to ethnic lines, with Israel gaining sovereignty over Jewish settlements, and the Palestinians gaining sovereignty over Arab neighbourhoods

– Refugees – The Parameters required the Palestinians to waive their claim to an unlimited “right of return” to Israel proper, and Israel to acknowledge the “moral and material suffering caused to the Palestinian people by the 1948 war, and the need to assist the international community in addressing the problem”. Under this agreement, an international commission would be established to implement all aspects associated with refugees as part of a permanent peace agreement. The Palestinian state would accept all refugees wishing to settle in its territory. The remaining refugees would be rehabilitated in their host countries, immigrate to third-party countries, and a limited number could settle in Israel if it agreed to accept them. Both sides would agree that United Nations General Assembly resolution 194 had been implemented.

– Security – The IDF would withdraw within thirty-six months and gradually be replaced by an international force. Israel would retain a small military presence in fixed locations in the Jordan Valley under the authority of the international force for another thirty-six months. This period could be reduced in the event of the diminishing of regional threats to Israel. Israel would also maintain three Early Warning Stations radar facilities in the West Bank. These facilities would have a Palestinian liaison and would be subject to review after every ten years, with any changes in their status to be mutually agreed upon by both parties.

– The Palestinian state would gain sovereignty over its own airspace, with special reservations for Israeli training and operational needs. The Palestinian state would also be defined as a “non-militarised state”, and would not possess conventional military forces, but would be allowed to have a strong security force. The Palestinian state would also have an international force for border security and deterrence.

– In the event of a military threat to Israel’s national security requiring a state of emergency, Israel would be allowed to deploy military forces to certain areas and routes, according to a pre-agreed map. International forces would have to be notified prior to any such deployments.

The Parameters required that this agreement put an end to the conflict and any other claims. This could be implemented through a UN Security Council Resolution declaring that Resolutions 242 and 338 have been implemented.

The proposal was presented on 23 December. On 28 December, the Israeli Government formally accepted the plan with reservations. In a meeting in the White House, on 2 January 2001, Yasser Arafat also officially accepted the Parameters but with reservations. The White House confirmed this the following day in a statement which said that “both sides have now accepted the president’s ideas with some reservations.” In 2005, Clinton wrote that he considered the Israeli reservations to be within the Parameters and the Palestinians’ outside them.

It is important to note that although Israel expressed disagreement with other provisions of Clinton’s framework, there was no explicit demand or ultimatum to remove them.

For instance, Israel expressed fear that granting Palestinian refugees a symbolic right of return to “historic Palestine” or “their homeland” might create ambiguity and open the door to further claims in the future.

Also, Israelis expressed unhappiness with the fact that Clinton’s framework called for a land swap encompassing 4%-6% of the West Bank, whilst Israel sought an 8% swap.

That said, Israel reiterated its willingness to negotiate within the framework of the Clinton Parameters.

By contrast, the Palestinians first rejected the Clinton Parameters before accepting them but with several objections that absolutely killed off any chance of success for the Clinton principles.

• Borders – Clinton’s framework called for a land swap encompassing 4%-6% of the West Bank, forcing Israel to remove 20% of Jewish settlers. The Palestinians insisted on a 2% swap, compelling Israel to uproot 50% of the settlers.

• Jerusalem – Clinton called for a division of the city along ethnic lines. The Palestinians did not accept Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighbourhood of Har Homa and part of the Armenian Quarter.

• Palestinian refugee issue – Clinton’s plan provided the Palestinians with a symbolic right of return to “historic Palestine” or “their homeland,” with most of the refugees to be resettled in the future Palestinian state.

However, the Palestinians insisted on exercising the right of return in Israel as well. They were also adamant that Israel had to accept full responsibility for the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem.

These open-ended terms insinuated that the PA wanted the refugee issue to remain on the table after the occupation ends. This blatantly contradicted the Clinton Parameters, which intended to come to an agreement that would “put an end to all claims.”

Following the failure of the Camp David Summit and whilst the Second Intifada was underway, PM Ehud Barak and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat met at the Taba Summit from 21 to 27 January 2001. At the Summit, Israel dropped all reservations and went beyond the Clinton Parameters. Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians 100% of the West Bank – instead of the 97% Clinton called for – in addition to docking in Israeli seaports and a tunnel connecting the West Bank and Gaza.

Although Taba came closer to agreeing on terms for a final settlement than any previous summits — negotiators from both sides said they were weeks away from reaching a deal — the Oslo process had run out of time. The summit ended only days before the Israeli election, which Barak lost to Ariel Sharon. The new prime minister was a staunch opponent of Oslo who had campaigned on promises to deal harshly with Palestinian violence. He made clear that the final status talks that had begun at Camp David were now dead.

So once again, the Palestinians did not miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity for peace with Israel.