LISTENING to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, one could be excused for wondering why, with the good will he is providing, a settlement with the Palestinians cannot be reached tomorrow. He has recently on separate occasions said he remains committed to the dismantling of Jewish West Bank settlements. He claims he is willing to meet “again and again” with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. And he states that Israel will look for ways to improve Palestinian living conditions.
But Olmert’s perceived desire for peace is always followed by the proviso that any steps toward a peace deal, including the removal of the settlements, depends entirely on whether Hamas recognizes Israel. A national unity Palestinian government involving both Hamas and Fatah is still to be drawn up but it is doubtful whether Olmert is waiting for an answer to his requests. Even as President Abbas was still in Makkah during the talks to end Palestinian-Palestinian fighting, Olmert warned him that Israel would not deal with any government that included Hamas. Then he telephoned President Bush to coordinate with him over ways to prevent the formation of a unity government or to hamper the government’s ability to maneuver should it be formed.
The coming Palestinian government will reaffirm “its commitment to a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian question in accordance with UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and the land- for-peace formula.” The government will also voice its general adherence to Arab and international agreements.
Such a position will, in all probability, not be enough for Olmert in view of one fact. Unlike previous Fatah-led governments, the next Palestinian government will make it clear that all Palestinian commitments vis-à-vis Israel, including possible de facto recognition of the Jewish state, are conditional on the following: Clear reciprocal Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state on 100 percent of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem as well as an equitable solution to the Palestinian refugee problem according to UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
Olmert demands that Hamas recognize Israel but he has made no mention of the need for a reciprocal Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state. This is where the Palestinians have gone wrong. They continue to base their negotiating positions on the assumption that Israel and, to an extent, the US are ready to conclude a final settlement acceptable to all. Not so. Whereas the Palestinians want a resolution to the conflict, the Israelis are not really seeking resolution. The former approach presumes the possibility of reaching a settlement satisfactory to both sides; the latter aims to utilize all possible means to debilitate the adversary until finally he has to cave in to the conditions dictated to him.
Certainly, this helps explain why the settlement process has dragged on for so long in the stumbling way it has, and why it will probably continue to do so, notwithstanding the positive things Olmert says. His actions certainly do not match his words.
