Israel's recent peace offensive may have been motivated in part by
personal or domestic politics, but the driving force behind its
willingness to negotiate is part and parcel of a much larger plan.
As the dynamics in the Middle East shift in response to the Iraq
War backlash and Iran's increasingly vigorous nuclear program,
Israel has finally conceded that peace with Syria holds the key to
rapprochement with the rest of the Arab world, including the
Palestinians. At this time it is clear that waiting any longer will
only increase Iran's threats to Israel's survival. If a
comprehensive peace with Syria can be agreed upon, Israel will have
a much better chance at successful negotiations with Lebanon and
the Palestinian Authority (PA) and be better equipped to deal with
Hizbullah and Hamas - all of which will become extremely important
as Israel gears up to face Iran.
Talks with Syria, Despite Bush's Objections
The decision to engage Syria in peace talks was in the making for
more than a year. I have been privy to some of the indirect talks
between the two sides, and I know first-hand that, had it not been
for the objections of the Bush administration, Israel would have
commenced these talks much earlier. Israel and Syria fully
understand the requirements for a peace agreement, which is the
return of the entire Golan Heights in exchange for comprehensive
peace with normal relations. Without establishing these
requirements in advance, it is doubtful that the two nations would
have entered into any negotiations, directly or indirectly.
The importance of engaging Syria from the Israeli perspective
cannot be overestimated. Without peace between Israel and Syria,
most Israelis believe that Israel will always remain insecure on
its northern front. Peace with Syria can also pave the way to an
Israeli-Lebanese normalcy, specifically because Syria is embedded
in Lebanon's social, economic and political makeup, and it
continues to exert tremendous influence over Hizbullah. Moreover,
Syria can wield significant influence on the Israeli-Palestinian
negotiating front because, more than any other Arab state, it
provides a sanctuary for radical Palestinian leaders and has an
influence over the political and financial support of Palestinian
extremist groups. Syrian influence transcends the Arab-Israeli
conflict because, as a predominantly Sunni state, Syria can shift
the dynamic of the Shiite-Sunni conflict away from a dangerous
escalation with the potential to engulf the entire region. More
importantly, in any effort to contain Iran's nuclear ambitions,
substantially reduce its influence in Lebanon and dramatically
weaken Hizbullah and Hamas, Syria matters because luring it out of
the Iranian grip would isolate Tehran, especially should it become
necessary as a last resort for Israel to attack Iran's nuclear
facilities.
Although some Israeli officials argue about Syria's role in the
search for Middle East solutions, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert,
Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni were
in full agreement that the Bush administration should invite Syria
to the Annapolis Middle East peace conference, knowing full well
that the Syrian delegation would raise the issue of the occupation
of the Golan Heights. They reasoned then, and they believe today,
that the constructive engagement of Damascus that could lead to
peace also has the potential to dramatically realign the forces
behind much of what troubles the region, which could help avoid a
potential war with Iran. Reports from Ankara about the Turkish
peace mediation between Israel and Syria suggest that the two
nations have made considerable progress, and that the two sides
will soon meet face-to-face to accelerate the negotiating process.
Syria's President Bashar al-Assad's recent statement expressing
optimism about the outcome of these negotiations clearly indicates
how far the two sides have come.
Negotiations with Hizbullah
Seeing it in this light explains Israel's various peace overtures
towards Lebanon, as well as its willingness to negotiate a prisoner
exchange with Hizbullah and accept a ceasefire agreement with
Hamas.
The negotiations between Hizbullah and Israel in connection with
the exchange of prisoners, and Israel's willingness to relinquish
Sheba'a Farms to the United Nations or to Lebanon were mutually
pursued for different reasons. Hizbullah's leaders fully understand
that the closer the understanding between Israel and Syria is, the
less leverage Hizbullah will have in any future negotiations.
Striking a deal with Israel now will allow them to take credit for
recovering Lebanese territory and to hail their resistance to
Israel as the key to their success. On the Israeli side, removing
the reasons behind Hizbullah's resistance will give Syria even
greater leverage over Hizbullah to bring about its disarmament in
due course. In making peace with Syria, Israel is basically
accepting the inevitable by returning the Golan. But making a move
at this time will, in particular, blunt any prospect of needing to
deal with another hostile front, should an attack on Iran become
inevitable.
Ceasefire with Hamas
Accepting a ceasefire with Hamas also has its own calculus: Without
peace with Syria, Israel would have most certainly opted for a
major operation against Hamas' forces in Gaza to put an end to the
reign of terror. But since the negotiations with Syria are going
well, a massive incursion into Gaza, which would have claimed huge
numbers of casualties on both sides, has -for the time being -
become unnecessary. Israel fully expects that Iran's support of
Hamas through Syria will eventually come to an end. This could
alleviate much of Israel's concern over the likelihood that Hamas
will take advantage of the ceasefire to rearm and regroup and be
better prepared for the next round.
Meanwhile, a period of calm will also allow the peace negotiations
between Israel and the PA to advance more rapidly, thereby
strengthening the hands of the Palestinian moderate forces led by
President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). Moreover, this will give
Israel an opportunity to reduce some of the stringent security
measures, including the removal of many roadblocks; release more
Palestinian prisoners; and allow a greater number of Palestinian
workers to seek employment in Israel. While this will certainly not
solve the complex dispute between the Israelis and the
Palestinians, it will show a concrete effort on Israel's part to
start making concessions in the name of peace. Israel will then be
in a better position to assist Abbas directly and indirectly in
building his security forces without being accused of pitting one
Palestinian faction against another.
Lebanon and Syria
Finally, Israel's peace overture towards Lebanon would have been an
empty gesture had it not been for the fact that Israel is
negotiating with Syria. For all intents and purposes, there is no
substantive dispute between Israel and Lebanon. Israel has no
territorial claims against Lebanon and is willing to relinquish
Sheba'a Farms either to the UN or directly to Lebanon. But this
issue, along with all other matters related to peacemaking between
Israel and Lebanon, depends largely on the kind of understanding
Israel and Syria reach concerning the future of Lebanon. Whereas on
the surface Syria will accept Lebanese sovereignty, it has and will
continue to seek recognition of its special relations with Lebanon.
Indeed, you can remove Syrian forces from Lebanon, but you cannot
take Syria's historic and cultural relations, as well as its
political, economic and security interests, out of Lebanon.
Although Israel's overture towards Lebanon is significant, as it
demonstrates the comprehensiveness of the Israeli approach, the
Israeli government should have no illusions about real prospects
for making peace with Lebanon before peace with Syria becomes
imminent.
Preventing an Israeli-Iranian Conflagration
As was demonstrated by Israel's major air exercise involving F-16
and F-15 fighters earlier this month, Iran's overt threats against
Israel's existence are being taken at face value. And should Iran's
uranium enrichment program get to a point of imminent danger,
Israel will need any alliances it can make in the meantime. Thus,
in any peacemaking efforts in the region, Syria has proved to be
the most strategic key in preventing all-out war. Historically,
Syria has demonstrated that once it commits itself to any agreement
or understanding, it usually fulfills its obligations. Sticking to
the rules of the 1974 disengagement agreement with Israel is one of
many examples. Should the current peace negotiations end
successfully, the Middle East's geopolitical dynamic will
experience an historical transformation, while preventing a major
conflagration between Israel and Iran. Both Syria and Israel fully
grasp the huge potential gain or losses should they succeed or
fail.