November 6, 2012 –
that’s the date when Barack Obama will stand for election for a
second term. By November 2011 he will already be deeply involved
in campaigning and most of his attention will be focused on
Middle America and not the Middle East. On November 2, midterm
elections will be held in the US in which members of Congress
(including all 435 in the House of Representatives and 34 of the
100 in the Senate) stand before the electorate.The US political
calendar is a map of the window of opportunity which might exist
for advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace.
There is no chance of an agreement without direct and decisive
US presidential engagement. After November 3, Obama will be able
to free up time and political space on his agenda for getting
directly involved in negotiating a peace agreement. He will have
about one year in which he can devote his time and political
collateral to that mission. After that, he will be back on the
campaign trail and he will either place his Middle East success
at the top of his campaign or he will have to bury his failure
and explain why it is a hopeless cause, but that “I did
everything humanly possible to help them to resolve their
conflict.”
But even before we reach November 3, one other date jumps off
the calendar with flashing red lights – September 26 – the end
of the 10-month moratorium on new settlement building. If the
government launches a new settlement building drive, as promised
by senior cabinet members, the barely living peace process will
die. Obviously the efforts of US mediator George Mitchell are
currently focused on providing a life-giving dose of adrenaline
in the form of moving to direct negotiations.
The idea is that if direct negotiations begin, Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu will be able to extend the building
moratorium for several more months to give the talks a chance of
success. Even if he buys into this formula, he will try to reach
an understanding with Obama that building within the settlement
blocks can resume because they will be annexed to Israel within
the framework of an agreement. The Palestinians will most
definitely reject any such understanding, stating that the
freezing of all settlement building is a requirement for direct
negotiations because without it there is no real demonstrated
intention to ever withdraw from the West Bank and allow for the
creation of a Palestinian state.
The time frame for negotiations is set. There is a window of
about one year to reach an agreement. By the end of 2011 the
Fayyad plan for creating the institutions of the Palestinian
state will have reached its end. The Palestinians will be more
anxious than ever to become independent and recognized by the
international community as a full-fledged member of the
community of nations. They will expect and work toward full
membership in the UN and sanctions against Israel if, as a
result of continued settlement activity, there is no real peace
process in advanced stages of reaching an agreement.
AT THE same time, they will also probably turn to their own
electorate. Without progress on the diplomatic front, it is
unlikely that the current practical and moderate leadership will
sustain itself. President Mahmoud Abbas has already stated his
intention not to run for reelection. With the exception of Salam
Fayyad, who has no political party or movement of significance
backing him, the arena of perspective candidates is far less
promising for reaching a possible agreement than the current
leaders.
The time factor for reaching peace has never been clearer and
more urgent. The clock is ticking and time is running out. In
the 32 years I have been involved in advancing peace, I have
never spoken about a deadline. But today, it is there and time
is not on our side. If it makes anyone feel better, I can also
say that time is not on their side either. Time is running out
for us both.
There is no solution to the conflict other than “two states for
two peoples.” There is a great likelihood that when the window
of opportunity closes at the end of 2011, there will no longer
be a real possibility to reach a negotiated agreement. There may
no longer be a moderate and practical Palestinian leadership
with which we can negotiate and there may no longer be a
majority of Palestinians who accept this solution.
Right now it is all in the hands of Netanyahu. He is the man who
can make it happen. The settlement issue has become the number
one factor in determining if there can even be a credible
negotiation. Netanyahu is the only Israeli leader who can say
that the primary goal of Zionism today is to consolidate the
State of Israel within recognized and negotiated borders.
That means that the Zionist enterprise must focus its attention
on strengthening what we have, and on transforming Israel into
the exemplary state that Theodor Herzl dreamed about. To achieve
this, it will even be necessary to say loud and clear that those
who wish to continue to build settlements are anti-Zionist,
working against the Zionist vision and leading the Zionist
movement toward national suicide. A true Zionist today is the
one who works for peace and the anti-Zionist is one who seeks to
prevent peace by building more settlements. True Zionism is
about the sustainability of the State of Israel, and the
greatest threat to its sustainability is the continuation of the
conflict with the Palestinian people.
The writer is the co-CEO of the
Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information
(www.ipcri.org) and an elected member of the leadership of the
Green Movement political party.