|
The
Palestinian-Israeli conflict has undergone a metamorphosis since 1948,
when it was accurately defined as being between Arabs and Jews.
However, it has now become a struggle between those who accept the
finality of the war in 1948 and its consequences, and those who have
not.
1948 made Israel an
irreversible reality in the Middle East, thereby undermining
Palestinian aspirations to reclaim what was lost during that tumultuous
year. However, 1948 also defined the limitations of Israeli ambitions,
and defined the boundaries of the Israeli state if Israel were ever to
win peace and acceptance from the Palestinian people and its Arab
neighbors. Since his
election in January, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has
made it abundantly clear where he stands. Despite being a president
without a state, he has campaigned and won a mandate for compromise and
peaceful negotiations. He has spent the first 100 days of his term
taking control of a chaotic security apparatus and corrupt bureaucracy.
He has started coordinating on the security situation with the Bush
administration's envoy, General William Ward, and on the disengagement
plan for Gaza and a small portion of the northern West Bank with the
Israelis. He has made key appointments to assure financial transparency
and referred high officials to the attorney general for corruption
investigations. Above all, he has been able to secure an extended
period of nonviolence against the Israelis by negotiating a "quiet"
period with militant extremists whom he cannot control by force. Abbas
comes to Washington later this week having rapidly compiled an
impressive record of reform and security achievements, which should
establish his credibility and earn him political support. He has risked
everything to pursue a negotiated end to the conflict. The
public posture of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon conveys neither
much support for Abbas, nor does it give him much credit for his
achievements. Sharon, despite real political problems, has to
demonstrate how far he is willing to go to pursue peace beyond
unilateral disengagement. From Israel's perspective there are two items
on the agenda for 2005: the disengagement plan and Palestinian reform.
Discussion of final-status issues, like borders, settlements, Jerusalem
and Palestinian refugees, has been placed in the deep freeze. For
the Palestinians to believe that peace is possible, they need an
immediate and palpable improvement in the quality of their lives
through an easing of the harsh realities of occupation and economic
improvement. The Bush administration is engaged in bringing about such
relief, but time is of the essence.
While
Abbas feels that he has done all he could on security and reforms, he
knows that Washington expects more of him. He will have a chance to
explain his policies and constraints to U.S President Georges W. Bush,
hoping to convince him to act before the proverbial window of
opportunity shuts. Obviously,
any viable Palestinian state has to be contiguous and free, must have
Arab Jerusalem as its capital and must be based on an end to the 1967
occupation. However, final-status issues are being determined by
unilateral Israeli steps such as expansion of the settlements, the
building of a separation wall, and, especially, the gradual isolation
of Jerusalem from the West Bank. All these steps threaten to render a
Palestinian state nonviable and they require a negotiated resolution of
final-status issues before it is too late. Creative
thinking is in order. With the 1967 border serving as the geographic
boundary between Israel and Palestine, some settlements can either be
swapped for land inside Israel, or leased to the Israelis for 25 years,
opening the possibility of Israelis living under Palestinian law. Arab
Jerusalem has to serve as a capital of Palestine in order to forestall
violence from those across the Muslim world who will invariably rally
to the idea of freeing Jerusalem from "Jewish occupation" for decades
to come. The city's holy places can be governed by the status quo
without defining sovereignty. Refugee
camps cannot continue being reservoirs of human misery, where dreams of
return to nonexistent homes and villages clash with practical and
political realities. The elected leaderships must accept the
responsibility of negotiating the fate of the refugees while defending
their legitimate national, communal and individual rights, including
the right to an apology for dispossession and exile. In the meantime,
practical solutions must be found to ease the disproportionate burden
borne by a third generation of poor and vulnerable refugees. Finally,
an international aid package must be prepared to secure peace. No
president has ever been in a better position to move forward in the
Middle East. Assured of Abbas' commitment to peace, Bush can
reinvigorate the "road map" by being clear and proposing tangible
policies. A reassured Israel is capable of doing more on issues like
checkpoints, the release of prisoners, settlements and restrictions on
permits of all sorts before ending the occupation. Empowered
by Bush's political support and cooperation from Sharon, Abbas will be
able to act decisively on security and reform. He will oversee a
peaceful disengagement coordinated with Israel and monitored by the
"Quartet." He will have his unified security apparatus face down
lawbreakers and will continue building the institutions of a modern
democratic state. Rising to
the call of history, Bush can help the Palestinians create a peaceful
state alongside Israel and gain a new ally in the circle of freedom and
democracy. Ziad Asali is president of the American Task Force on Palestine. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR. |
