All We Are Saying Is...
...that the international community (read Europe) is going to have to get over itself and start putting some actual pressure on the Palestinians if there is ever going to be a successful peace plan. Ultimately I believe that something similar to the Geneva plan will be the basis of peace. However if members of the Palestinian delegation that came up with the plan can't even stick to it during the document signing ceremony, then there will never be a successful peace plan.
It also reported that participants were disappointed to learn that a member of the Palestinian delegation published an editorial that said, "Nowhere in this document have we given up on the right of return, and anyone who believes we have has fallen into the Israeli trap."
Yes, the words of someone who actually wants peace with the Israelis. I know that when I really want to settle a problem with someone, I refer to his/her compromises as a "trap" and deny that I even made a key concession.
A lot of pressure is placed by the rest of the world on the Israelis to "show restraint." Pressure also needs to be placed on the Palestinians to do the same thing and to be realistic about a peace plan (as in one that doesn't basically decimate Israel). The Israelis can't do it; the Palestinians won't listen to them. The other Arab nations won't do it; they benefit too much from the violence, as it keeps their populations' eyes turned on the common enemy and off the domestic governmental ones. The U.S. can't do it by itself; no one trusts us enough to be objective.
The European governments need to get a grip and realize that Israelis can't make peace by themselves; they need a willing partner. What happened at the document signing ceremony certainly indicates that there is no truly willing partner; at least not one currently involved in any process. Only sufficient Western pressure (even-handed pressure) will drag one to the table, even if it is kicking and screaming. After that, the (even-handed) pressure to abide by the settlement will need to be kept in place until such time it is no longer necessary. And that might take many years and even the threat of troops.
Comments
Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat, Tit for tat.
If the Palestinians actually do accept the refugee provision, they are being more than realistic about the peace plan; of course this has been the biggest sticking point for ages.
I'm sorry, but there are two intractable right wing factions that are obviously content to continue blowing up buses or building walls and settlements until (literally) kingdom come.
I sincerely doubt that any European pressure is going to make a damn bit of difference.
Posted by: Anne | December 4, 2003 11:30 AM
Anne, you are reading a helluva lot into my post, and if you want to know what I actually believe, why don't you ask me? I was not talking about either Sharon or Arafat. I agree that as long as they are both in power, there won't be peace. I wasn't talking about the immediate future either.
However if this is the reaction of a moderate Palestinian delegate, to deny that a key concession understood by the Israeli delegation to have been made was made and to refer to "Israeli traps", then what do you think the future holds, after the right wing factions are out of power? Beilin and his delegation made serious concessions. The type that will ultimately need to be made for a real peace to be brought about. The Palestinians are going to have to concede the right of return ultimately. No peace will go forward without that. If it did, there would be no state of Israel any longer. Or at least no state for ethnic Jews, which is never going to fly with the Israelis. What good does it do to go forward with a document signing and then deny the key concession was made? What good does it do to make peace, and then refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing on your part, requiring that only the person you make peace with acknowledge wrongdoing? Is this going to bring about peace? No. If you had a fight with someone and both of you were wrong, would you accept an "apology" which required you to acknowledge that you were completely at fault and the other party was not at fault? I really doubt you would. Very few people would.
I do believe that the Europeans could exercise pressure on the moderate Palestinian delegation. On Arafat? NFW. Never happen. Not on Hamas either. But these people weren't Arafat or Hamas.
Posted by: Lesley | December 4, 2003 11:42 AM
I wasn't talking about Sharon or Arafat either; the danger of "right wing" in this dispute isn't necessarily coming from the governments.
This is why I went off in the direction of the right wing problem; I don't believe anymore that moderates have the ability to pull this off on either side, and the quoted comment smacked of right wing influence. (Although, in saying that, it should be clarified that the right of return is an explosive point for the most moderate of Arabs.)
As for the delegate who made this statement... I question if he was quoted accurately? If so, who is he conveying the message to? Right of return is the hottest issue on the Arab street and it seems to me that broaching the topic has to be done with extreme care. However, I agree that if the statement was quoted accurately, it is a problem... because eventually - if peace is ever to be had - it has to be put (and kept) on the table (with no small amount of propaganda to "sell" the idea).
Posted by: Anne | December 4, 2003 01:49 PM
Only moderates can eventually pull a peace process off. The positions of the right-wingers on either side will never be acceptable to the right-wingers of the other side.
I also think that in all the reading you did, you probably didn't read many musings by the average person living in the situation. I really don't think that the situation is as intractable as you paint it to be. Trot some more around the blogosphere. Read some of the Israeli blogs as well as the Arab blogs you have linked. Then come back and tell me that the primary factions only want to build settlements and blow up buses.
Posted by: Lesley | December 4, 2003 04:35 PM
I get the feeling there are a lot of people on both sides who feel,like they are held hostage by the willingness of their "leaders" to go to the mattresses at the drop of a hat.
Posted by: Rick DeMent | December 4, 2003 08:59 PM
It's a good settlement, and the road map to a dead end should be completely abandoned in favor of it. What tells you it's a good settlement is that both Arafat and Sharon dislike it. Sharon dislikes it more intensely than Arafat I believe, but I don't know what he thinks he has to lose--his approval numbers are at 33% (disapproval 59%).
I have no problem sending NATO troops to make viable the security of an agreement which resolves both the settlement issue (total withdrawal from the occupied territories) and the right of return. This problem has been a thorn in the side of western interests for ages.
Posted by: Jim | December 5, 2003 09:32 PM