Palestinians and Israelis are embroiled in controversy over what deal, if any, has been bequeathed to them. At the moment, the only frame of reference is the Mitchell report but it is a very fragile document that is unlikely to stand the test of time largely because it sacrificed credibility for expediency. To earn Ariel Sharon’s approval, the report made several unacceptable concessions, such as omitting any reference to Security Council Resolution 242, the universally accepted basis for any peace settlement, and absolving Sharon of any blame for the incident most observers believe triggered the uprising, which was his provocative visit to Al-Haram Al-Sharif in September.
Unlike the Egyptian-Jordanian initiative, which calls for the participation of Russia, the European Union, Egypt, Jordan and the UN as sponsors of the process, the Mitchell report seems to advocate that the US alone assume the role of sponsor. A new administration not wed to the process and determined to learn the lessons of the past could have created a different environment. But Washington has parroted without reservation the complete cessation of violence call which Sharon insists on. This, even though for months the US said a substantial reduction in violence should be enough to earn reciprocal gestures by Israel, such as easing the restrictions on movement by Palestinians and withdrawing Israeli troops to their positions last September.
Palestinians have called on Israel to implement the Mitchell report without waiting for a full cease-fire. They want the peace process to move swiftly beyond a cease-fire and cooling off-period to confidence-building measures, something Israel has repeatedly rejected, but which must be put in place in tandem with security measures, else it will not function. However, during his recent Mideast tour, Colin Powell claimed only Israel should be the judge of whether a cease-fire was in force and to make a judgment as to whether or not it is quiet and by what definition. Things will never be quiet as long as Israel continues its strategy of attacking Palestinian resistance fighters and activists, as its security Cabinet did this week. The Israelis call it interception but everybody else calls it assassination and it has met with US, UN and European opposition.
On his European swing in France and Germany, Sharon also faced tough questions on his public vilification of Yasser Arafat, whom he has branded a murderer and pathological liar. France also said Sharon’s demands for a complete end to the violence before serious goodwill gestures are made may block the path to peace.
But it was Israel’s settlements and Sharon’s unwillingness to stop building them despite the Mitchell report’s recommendation to do so immediately which upset the Europeans the most. There have been at least 25 new outposts established in the occupied territories since Sharon’s election victory in February. All serve as the instrument that allows the settlements to expand beyond their current boundaries.
Israelis are at odds with their prime minister’s reluctance to entertain peace initiatives. According to updated polls, most Israelis in contrast to their leader, support a settlement freeze in return for a cease-fire with the Palestinians. A Gallup poll of 600 Israelis for the daily Maariv showed 56 percent believe Israel should freeze Jewish settlement construction on occupied land. Despite what his people say and what the world demands, it is highly unlikely Sharon will ever freeze settlement expansion, or uproot them or reverse the new geo-political reality that is being created by their establishment.
Perhaps the most glaring omission in the Mitchell report is the basic reason why the intifada began. The occupation. So long as there is an occupation there will never be peace. Occupation is the source of the violence, the source of the main problems, and it is the reason Israel can never have real peace. Occupation with tanks, soldiers, checkpoints and settlements is violence and it is much greater than anything Palestinians have done in the way of resistance.
