Close to a century has elapsed since the start of the Arab-Jewish
conflict in Palestine, now known as the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict. The years have failed to end it. On the contrary, it has
increased in fierceness and violence. One of the parties to the
conflict has already realized its goal: a sovereign and independent
state. The other is still struggling to achieve this aim. What is
becoming increasingly obvious is that the conflict is spilling over
beyond the region, inspiring radicals and extremists who are using
it as justification for their actions. This conflict which - so far
- is national in nature threatens to turn into a conflict between
Muslims and Jews.
The international community that played an active role after the
Second World War in helping the creation of the Jewish state of
Israel has, for many decades, turned a deaf ear to the demands of
the Palestinian people for freedom and justice. It was wrongly
assumed that the Palestinian refugees would give up their demands
for a national homeland and would be absorbed into their countries
of exile. This did not happen. The 1967 war between Israel and its
neighboring Arab countries enhanced and revived Palestinian
national identity and boosted the Palestinian struggle for
liberation and independence.
Israel failed to capitalize on the opportunity to make peace right
after the war. Its sweeping victory was an inducement for the
acquisition of more land and expansion at the expense of the
Occupied Palestinian Territories. This policy has since been
fueling the ongoing conflict. The outcome is more bloodshed and
more victims on both sides.
Europe proved unable to play an independent political role in the
search for a solution to the conflict, deterred and hampered as it
is by an American policy whose underlying principle is the
prevention of any international involvement in Middle East
politics. Any such involvement would be blamed for undermining the
so-called peace process sponsored by the U.S., which has always
been known for its unflagging bias towards Israel. The only time
the American administration made a genuine effort to solve the
conflict was in the Camp David Summit (2000), hosted by
then-President Bill Clinton. The summit failed, and no further
steady attempts were made by the U.S. to bridge the gap between the
two parties and to push for a political settlement to the conflict.
The outcome was the escalation of the al-Aqsa intifada, including
suicide attacks against Israeli targets that were met with
intensified Israeli military action against the Palestinians,
causing hundreds of casualties and the destruction of Palestinian
life on all levels and in all its aspects. This Israeli policy
resulted in the marginalization and isolation of the forces of
moderation within Palestinian society, and instead strengthened the
forces of radicalism and fundamentalism.
The appearance of the Islamic movement in Palestine represented by
Hamas has received mixed reactions from the international
community. However, whatever pragmatic signals that have come from
the leaders of Hamas in recent days must not lead to the assumption
that the role of the moderate national movement, headed by Fateh,
is to be discounted. The role of the national movement is crucial
for the consolidation of any settlement to the conflict.
An international conference for peace in the Middle East, based on
the Arab Peace Initiative of the Beirut Arab Summit of 2002, should
be explored and implemented. But two main prerequisites are
imperative for the success of such a conference:
First, Israel must restrain its policy of acquiring more
Palestinian and Arab land by putting an immediate freeze on all of
its settlement activity. It will also have to make at least a
declaration of intent that it will withdraw from all territories
that it occupied in the 1967 war, including East Jerusalem, and to
abide by the relevant UN resolutions. This will open the door to a
comprehensive settlement that will include Syria and Lebanon.
Second, the Bush Administration has neglected the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict and became obsessed with the so-called
war on terror. It got mired in Iraq, turning the country into a
breeding ground for terror. Now, it must reconsider its policy in
the Middle East and adopt an even-handed approach, discarding such
unworkable plans as the "provisional state" or "provisional
borders" in a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
The Road Map in its current form is outdated. It has to be either
revised or updated to meet the developments that have occurred in
the region during the last five years. Past experience has shown
that long-term interim arrangements can only complicate the
situation. The aim of the international conference should be to
achieve a clear-cut final settlement, with implementation
mechanisms, timetables, international guarantees and monitoring
arrangements. Such a settlement can bring peace and stability, not
only to the Middle East, but to the world at large.