The two biggest problems straddling the Palestinian fence today — Israel on one side and the Palestinian divisions on the other — are currently undergoing treatment with possible remedy in sight. For one, Hamas has said it is ready to hold reconciliation talks with the rival Fatah group of President Mahmoud Abbas, hinting it might be willing to relinquish control of Gaza. The other glimmer of light sees Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert committing himself to devoting the next year to pursuing peace with the Palestinians, claiming he would not seek excuses in order to avoid a peace process. These two statements would if taken individually, mark a dramatic turn for the better of the peace process; in unison they are peace parallels heading toward a final settlement, the avowed aim of the US-sponsored Middle East conference slated for next month. On the surface, it would appear that the conference’s agenda is being paved smoothly and rather fortuitously in time for Condoleezza Rice’s seventh trip to the region this year, this latest one to see to it that the summit succeeds.
Success in this conference is relative. The outright differences in perceptions by the parties concerned makes the conference’s ambitions as varied as the opinions of it. However, whatever its end product, the summit begins with an anomaly that will be difficult to treat. The statements of good will by Hamas and Israel might ironically not in the least lead to whatever success the summit might ultimately come up with. Hamas has not been invited and in turn, is urging Fatah and other Arab parties not to attend. The Hamas fear is that Israel and the US will take advantage of the Palestinian rift to try to wrest concessions in the negotiations, that there will be Fatah and US desperation for something concrete to show to their constituencies, and that in the haste for a deal full Palestinian rights will not be met. And since Hamas remains a power player, its two-way boycott of the conference threatens to wreck anything that may come out of the summit.
As for Israel, that it would rather stick with vague principles such as two states living side by side in peace, while the Palestinians insist on listing specific points the conference would begin to address — the future of Jerusalem, borders, refugees and settlements — says loads about genuine intentions. And as for Olmert wanting peace, he wants it solely with the pro-Western government of Abbas, for anyone who subscribes to the US-Israeli view of things in the Middle East is prized by both Washington and Tel Aviv. Abbas’ and Olmert’s bi-monthly meetings have so far been nothing but photo-ops; releasing five or 10 Palestinian prisoners every fortnight will neither bolster Abbas in the eyes of Palestinians nor are they the major, “painful” concessions Israel must make for a true settlement to be reached.
The Middle East conference is being preceded by some positive statements from Israel and Hamas which oddly enough, might not make a difference in the meeting’s peace prospects.
