Direct
Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are likely to resume in the
near future. Both sides will reluctantly pay a price to enter
the room even though neither side is too anxious to actually be
there.
Netanyahu’s price tag will be the extension of the settlement
building moratorium (even though he will try to continue
building in east Jerusalem in areas that he believes will be
part of the annexed areas). Abbas’s price tag will be the
removal of all the pre-conditions for direct negotiations that
he has held onto for the past seven months. Both sides faced the
weight of White House pressure in order to come to the “right”
decision. So the negotiations will begin. But let’s face it,
since the launching of the Oslo process, the problem in the
Israeli-Palestinian relationship has never really been how to
begin negotiations – the problem has always been how to conclude
them.
IS THERE a starting point for these negotiations? Abbas demands
that the negotiations should resume from the point where they
ended in the previous round between himself and then prime
minister Ehud Olmert. Before being indicted, Olmert presented
Abbas with a plan complete with maps that included establishing
the Palestinian state in 94 percent of the West Bank with
territory exchange of lands inside of Israel proper in the
amount of almost four percent. There would be two capitals in
Jerusalem. There would be a symbolic return of Palestinian
refugees called family reunification, appropriate security
arrangements and coordination at all levels, and an agreement on
the end of conflict and claims. Those talks did not reach an
agreement because they were cut short before they had chance.
Abbas wonders why we have to start from the zero point. In 16
years of negotiations, some progress has been made, why should
there not be continuity from one round of negotiations to the
next? Netanyahu keeps on saying “try me – you will be
surprised,” but with Netanyahu’s own ideological positions and
his coalition constraints, it is unlikely that any offer he puts
on the table can be accepted by any Palestinian leader.
With this in the background, the direct negotiations seem rather
futile. The Palestinian hope is that after the US midterm
Congressional elections in November, President Barack Obama will
table his own set of parameters for peace that will enable the
negotiations to move forward.
But unfortunately looking at the performance of Obama and his
team so far, it seems rather unreasonable to expect or to hope
that the increasingly unpopular US president will delve into
something as difficult as resolving the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.
The chances of success are much less than failure. With the need
to focus on the economy and the with war in Afghanistan sending
home an increasing number of dead NATO soldiers, no new
government in Iraq, a dangerous war on terrorism in Pakistan and
Yemen, and a percolating global crisis in Iran, why should Obama
even attempt to rescue the Israelis and Palestinians from their
own inability to resolve their own conflict? Obama used to
describe the resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict as a
“vital US national security interest.”
Today, it seems that the Israeli Palestinian conflict has been
downgraded to a nuisance that won’t go away but one that we can
live with. That might be the view from Washington, but from
Jerusalem, for both Israelis and Palestinians the resolution of
our conflict is an existential reality. One of our problems is
that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians do not believe
that peace is possible; neither believes that there is a partner
for peace on the other side and both sides are experiencing an
unprecedented period of calm and economic growth. The “status
quo” seems pretty good – why upset it? Israelis seems quite
content to ignore the continuation of the conflict, they don’t
feel it nor do they see it. Palestinians have become invisible
for most of them and aside from Israel’s increasing
international isolation life seems pretty good. In the West
Bank, Palestinians are enjoying security and calm which they
have never known. The new-found stability has created economic
growth which provides the same sense of “leave us alone and let
us live.”
There will be no ground swell of public outcry to make peace
neither in Israel nor in Palestine.
WHERE ARE the responsible adults who will understand the
urgency? Time is not on our side and time is also not on the
side of the Palestinians. Last month I wrote that our peace
timetable is linked to the US elections calendar. I personally
have lost the hope that Obama will save us from ourselves. I am
not expecting any real US presidential engagement. My revised
time table is linked more to the lifeline of the moderate
Palestinian leadership. No leader remains in power forever,
although some of the leaders in our region seem to look that
way. The leadership timeline of Abbas and Fayyad is nearer to
its end than to its beginning.
Abbas will soon retire and Fayyad lacks a political movement
behind him. While Fayyad’s success in creating stability and
economic growth is admired equally by Palestinians as it is by
rest of the world, without a political movement behind him and
because he has effectively closed the finance faucet to Fatah,
his political lifeline, unfortunately, may not be too long as
well.
The opportunity to reach an Israeli-Palestinian agreement will
never be better. A deal can be reached, all issues in conflict
can be resolved and I am quite sure that at the end of the
process, the Palestinian side will be prepared to recognize
Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people. If we lose this
opportunity we may have to come to the conclusion that the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict will never be resolved.
There is a majority on both sides in support of the “twostates
for two-peoples” solution. There is no other solution to this
conflict. The next generation of Palestinian leaders is likely
to be less moderate, less pragmatic and less willing to accept
the limitations of the only existing solution.
Missing the opportunity to divide the land into two states
leaves us with the reality of two peoples living under one
state.
Netanyahu and Abbas are responsible. They can both reach a deal
and they can both deliver. Is it completely audacious to hope
that they will? Probably, but hope may be all that we have left.
The writer is the Co-CEO of
IPCRI, the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information
(www.ipcri.org) and an elected member of the leadership of
Israel’s Green Movement Political Party.