Two Former Allies Reflect on Their Pursuit of Peace in the Middle East

It may be difficult to recall now, with Gazans struggling to survive under siege and Israelis, galvanized by the trauma of October 7, appearing ready to annex the West Bank, but there was a period when peace in the Middle East seemed attainable.

In 2003, upon moving to Washington to report on foreign policy, I became part of a circle of human rights advocates, policy experts, and Capitol Hill aides committed to advancing a two-state solution. A decade had passed since Israelis and Palestinians embarked on this path following the Oslo interim agreement. Despite the second intifada sparking widespread frustration, optimism lingered that an agreement might still be reached. Two friends among us embodied this hope.

Daniel Levy, the charismatic son of a British noble, and Ghaith al-Omari, a reserved Jordanian attorney, were widely recognized for having represented opposing sides during the 2001 peace negotiations in Taba, Egypt. Their friendship became a powerful symbol in Washington of the possibility for reconciliation. At one gathering, the host introduced them with the words: “If peace ever comes to the Middle East, it will be because of these two.”

Curious about their reflections on their peace efforts, I recently reached out to them. I wanted to know if they still believed peace was achievable or if those hopes had been overly idealistic. I was also eager to find out if their friendship endured. Their relationship, I discovered, had experienced ebbs and flows, mirroring the peace process itself, before taking an unexpected turn.

During the Taba negotiations, Mr. Levy served as an advisor to Yossi Beilin, the most dovish member of the Israeli delegation, while Mr. Omari advised Yasir Abed Rabbo, the most dovish member of the Palestinian side. They came closer than ever to reaching a lasting agreement, but the process was halted by Israeli elections and never resumed. Despite this setback, both men remained committed to the cause.