The Arab Peace Initiative, signed by all Arab countries, presents a
new perspective on the peace process and deals with most of the
problems that have led to a lack of faith in peace in Israeli
society in general and the "disappearance" of the peace camp in
particular. Public information campaigns to clarify the issues
could help increase support for the Initiative.
What Is Peace?
Over the years different polls have shown that a large portion of
Israeli society is willing to make far-reaching concessions in
return for true peace. Even the non-ideological settler is willing
to give up his home in return for peace - but he is willing to do
so only in return for true peace, an unattainable idea for many
Israelis. At least 60 years of biased education, media and
leadership have created a reality in which it appears inconceivable
that it might be possible to reach a situation where the
Arab-Israeli conflict no longer exists. One might even say that
most residents of Israel cannot imagine the state of "end of
conflict" any more than they can comprehend the infinity of the
universe.
The Arab Peace Initiative provides an answer to this problem. The
Initiative, approved by the 22 Arab countries, does not only offer
peace but something much more concrete: an end to the Arab-Israeli
conflict and normalized relations with the Arab states.
The hope for real peace cannot be quantified. Normalization, on the
other hand, can be explained: Arab tourism, a railway line to
Damascus, import and export, a flourishing economy and a state no
longer surrounded by enemies. It is no coincidence that the Arab
states consider normalization to be the big prize that Israel will
receive if it agrees to the three major conditions of the Arab
states: full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories; a
just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem, based on United
Nations General Assembly Resolution 194; and a Palestinian state in
the West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem as the capital. It is
also no coincidence that these three demands are identical to the
demands of the Palestinian leadership. If Israel declares that it
will negotiate on the basis of the Initiative, it can definitely
get a lot more for the same price that it has considered in the
past and is currently considering paying for an agreement with the
Palestinians.
No Partner?
The idea that there is no partner has been well established in
Israel, based on the following arguments: The late Palestinian
President Yasser Arafat did not really want peace; President
Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) may want peace but is too weak; and
Ismail Haniyeh, the dismissed Hamas prime minister, has the
power but not the will. At the same time, it could also be said
that Israel did everything in its power to create the concept of
"no partner."
When then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak said that he had offered
"everything" and Arafat had refused, few in the Israeli media and
society questioned what Barak had actually offered. Today the
Israeli public perceives Abbas as wanting peace but being too weak
to reach an agreement, not to mention upholding one. Yet it is the
Israeli government that has contributed to his weakness by not
meeting his demands for the elimination of checkpoints, sufficient
prisoner releases and progress in the negotiations that will
eventually lead to the creation of a Palestinian state.
The "Mecca Agreement" signed in early 2007 between Fateh and Hamas
led to discussion of Hamas' acceptance of previous international
agreements signed by the PLO. Although this tacit understanding has
been broken, a breakthrough could be reached by securing some form
of support from Hamas for the same. Saudi or Egyptian involvement
may promote Abbas' ability to carry out his part of the agreement,
and considerably ease internal tensions within the West Bank and
Gaza. It would also allow the Palestinian street to better accept
any agreement reached.
In order to promote such an intervention, and possibly even an
intervention by other Arab countries, Israel should accept the Arab
Peace Initiative as a basis for negotiations. This move would pass
some of the responsibility to the Arab states and make them into a
kind of framework that could be presented to the Israeli society as
a partner that can be trusted and that would strongly support
Abbas.
All this, of course, does not change the fact that the negotiations
themselves and the agreement signed would be carried out first and
foremost between the Palestinian leadership and the government of
Israel.
The Core Issues
There are a number of sensitive core issues that have to be dealt
with to achieve an agreement. Among the most crucial are Jerusalem
and the question of the right of return.
Jerusalem. Without a solution in Jerusalem, there will be no
comprehensive solution. There is an urgent need for a public
information campaign to clarify that Jerusalem is not united and
that large parts of Jerusalem today were annexed, to be used as
bargaining chips in future negotiations and to create a "security
belt" around the city. Different models for dealing with Jerusalem
have been offered that can and should be discussed, including a
Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. It is also possible to
decide, quite courageously, that Jerusalem indeed needs to be
united, and to understand that the only way to keep it united is by
giving up exclusive claims over it and turning it into a city for
everyone and a city of no one, through internationalization or
other means.
A peace agreement that includes normalization with the Arab
countries and the declaration of the end of the Arab-Israeli
conflict are a great prize. Concessions on Jerusalem, which are in
actuality not concessions but rather acts of recognition of the sad
situation in Jerusalem and identifying the situation as it is -
these are prices worth paying for such a prize.
The right of return. The Israeli public perceives the right of
return to be the end of the State of Israel as it exists today; it
is a demographic danger and will mean millions of Palestinians
knocking at our doors demanding their houses back. More than the
issue of Jerusalem, the question of refugees and the right of
return is considered the greatest obstacle to the acceptance of a
peace offer, even among the Israeli left.
The Arab Peace Initiative was worded with Israeli society as the
audience, and the clause dealing with the refugee issue calls for
"a just solution to the refugee problem to be agreed-upon." The
reference to UN Resolution 194 and other additions to this
statement attempts to deal with pressures from several countries
within the Arab League. But they do not change the fact that what
is required from Israel is to reach an agreed-upon solution, that
both we and the Palestinians agree upon.
It is true that the dream of full and complete return still exists,
especially among refugees still living in the camps; however, some
senior Palestinian and Arab officials claim that the right of
return implies no more than an Israeli recognition of the right as
a matter of principle. Such recognition would in fact require
reparations (but these would undoubtedly be paid mostly by the
United States and European countries) in addition to an agreed-upon
number of refugees allowed to return to Israel, for example,
100,000 refugees within 10 years. A public information campaign
detailing the specific numbers and facts of the right of return
will make it less threatening, and clarify that it is a price well
worth paying for normalization.
In addition to a peace agreement, the recognition of the right of
return will also provide a beginning for a process of regional
healing. The history books are written by the victors, and the
injustice done to those who were the inhabitants of this land is
not told in the textbooks. But the conquered have not vanished.
They are here among us and in our neighboring countries. For us,
peace is to be made mainly with them, and such recognition will
help the Israeli population understand the distress of the other
side, and will perhaps give the refugees a new start. This may be a
far-reaching goal and may even be naive, but if it were to come
true, we could hope for a new generation with completely different
mindsets.
The Occupied Territories
Many Israelis would be willing to give up the occupied territories
in return for real peace. Just as the peace camp temporarily
supported former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during the
disengagement from the Gaza Strip, it would even more powerfully
support any prime minister who presents a comprehensive
agreement.
Many of the settlers, too, would be ready to evacuate the
settlements in the territories in return for compensation, and it
would be appropriate to encourage an organized and less traumatic
evacuation in the early stages of the negotiations.
Strangely enough, the question of the occupied territories is the
least of the obstacles that a comprehensive peace process faces.
Over the years the understanding that a Palestinian state will be
created and that the occupation of the territories is temporary has
changed the question of returning the territories to the
Palestinians: It is no longer a question of if, but of when and for
what purpose.
The Arab States
All 22 Arab states have signed on to the Arab Peace Initiative,
reconfirming this commitment at the Arab League's 2007 summit in
Riyadh. The presence of the secretary general of the Arab League
and foreign ministers of the member states at the Annapolis
conference was an important step forward.
While, ideally, Israel should have addressed the Initiative in a
comprehensive manner from the start in 2002, the Arab League
members' inability to back their commitment through more concrete
steps has allowed the Initiative to effectively slide off the
public and media radar in Israel.
There are two ways in which the Arab League could promote the
Initiative in 2008. First, recognizing that Israeli public support
is crucial, the Arab states could accept offers from Israeli civil
society organizations to open a dialogue on the basis of the
Initiative. This would serve to revive the largely moribund Israeli
peace camp, which can then move forward with efforts to mobilize
the public behind the Initiative. Second, the Arab states could
unite in inviting Israel to participate in marathon talks based on
the Initiative with direct Quartet support, with the aim of
establishing the basis for a comprehensive resolution of the
conflict.
Explaining the Initiative to the Israeli Public
The Israeli public has a key role to play in accepting the
Initiative. No prime minister will be able to carry out such a
far-reaching agreement without widespread support from Israeli
society.
An effective campaign would succeed in selling the Initiative also
to people from the center and moderate right-wing from the
perspective of cost and impact, political gain and personal gain.
Additionally, the campaign would explain, through people in the
security sector, former generals and Middle East experts, the way
in which the Initiative would contribute to the security of the
country's citizens. Above all, such a campaign would transform the
concepts of comprehensive peace, normalization and "end of
conflict" to accessible concepts that can be imagined, accepted and
aspired to.
<