Those of us who have worked for a Palestinian state, and will continue to do so as long as there is breath in our bodies, can surely be forgiven for being cautious over an apparent new peace plan for the Middle East. So many such plans have come and gone over the last twenty or thirty years leaving few footprints in the sand.
For diplomats these are difficult times in the Middle East. The Palestinians have been only a whisker away from a civil war, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was gravely damaged politically by the dreadful and incompetent war in Lebanon against Hezbollah last summer. Many think another such war between Israel and Hezbollah is around the corner. Iraq is in a civil war and a lethal mess and, as forecast, the “surge” of American troops — at least so far — has brought in its wake a higher death toll.
America would appear to be concentrating more on Tehran than Jerusalem. Those ugly aircraft carriers — floating American small towns well stocked with bombs — off the Iranian coast are there to give a message. Without intent on either side, a shooting war could begin with Iran.
On March 28 Arab leaders started a two-day summit in the Saudi capital with the aim of relaunching a land-for-peace offer to Israel. Saud Al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said Israel must seize the opportunity presented to it.
“If Israel refuses, that means it doesn’t want peace. Then (the conflict) goes back into the hands of the lords of war.”
I warmly welcome this Saudi initiative first launched by them in Beirut in 2002. They are right to give it another push. It takes us back to the sound principles of Lord Caradon’s Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967. Israel is offered a proper peace with each and every Arab state in return for a Palestinian state within the former 1967 boundaries and with its capital in East Jerusalem. If one day there is to be peace it will be on that basis, I am certain.
In 2002 Israel rejected the Arab initiative. However, on March 30 Ehud Olmert was in a curiously optimistic mood. He told Yedioth Ahronoth:
“I am convinced that within five years Israel will be able to reach a comprehensive peace arrangement with its enemies.”
In an interview with Haaretz he said:
“We are ready to hold discussions and hear from the Saudis about their approach and tell them about ours. Saudi Arabia is the country that in the end will determine the ability of the Arabs to reach a compromise with Israel.”
He also asked the new United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, to tell King Abdullah that the proposal was “good and challenging.”
Olmert, to many people’s surprise, also welcomed without hesitation the proposal by the secretary-general to bring Palestine and Israel together in an extended meeting of the Quartet. (The UN, US, EU and Russia). They would be joined by Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.
Olmert, who is experiencing seriously low poll ratings in Israel, cannot have been surprised to find his attitude to the Arab leaders and the Saudi-prepared peace plan was met with derision at home.
His critics thought it smacked of cheap populism. Meanwhile his Arab critics accused him of wanting to turn the peace offer into general negotiations, without Israel being forced to make concessions over conquered Arab land. I fear they have a point.
I regard the Arab position as straightforward; the world does not consider Israel should continue to occupy Arab territory. Olmert’s thinking is more difficult to understand, for Israelis have forced him to abandon giving up major Israeli settlements, which was to have been the hallmark policy of his government. I suspect Iran’s growing political and military strength in the area might have persuaded him he needed to make some positive moves. Israelis have also been shocked by the continued refusal of Hamas to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Working with the Arab leaders could outflank Hamas.
I do take some encouragement from Condoleezza Rice’s diplomacy in the area. Certainly the American secretary of state did not achieve all her goals, but she did succeed in persuading Ehud Olmert to meet regularly with President Mahmoud Abbas. When President George Bush first entered the White House he refused to follow President Bill Clinton’s negotiating path. Condoleezza Rice has shifted her president’s approach. Like the United States or loathe it, the world’s only hyperpower has a major role to play. No other country has any major influence over Israel.
I fear a just, honorable and lasting settlement is many moons away, but the Saudi government should be congratulated for laying some important foundations.
