The show must go on

06Oct07

I’m working on a longer piece at the moment, but in the meantime here’s the latest Act in the long-running (over 40 years!) West End Bank smash hit, the Middle East ‘Peace Process’.

President Abbas has been talking tough, perhaps in an effort to cover up his capitulation on the issue of timetables or to compensate more generally for his political weakness and utter dependence upon the U.S. and Israel. As Ha’aretz notes, his hardened rhetoric is likely an attempt to gain popularity with the Palestinian public, who simply will not accept a ‘peace’ that is in fact a legitimisation of the occupation. Abbas has promised to put any proposed settlement to a public referendum, including the refugees, before making it final, which puts his policy in line with Hamas’.

All sides publicly agree that the November “peace conference” must be serious and meaningful, but they appear to differ in their conceptions of what this actually entails. As Ha’aretz explains:

‘The parties differ greatly on the results they would like the conference to yield, with Abbas looking for agreement on core issues – Jerusalem, refugees and borders – while Olmert seeks a vague statement of interests.

Israeli officials said the statement would be “significant enough but general enough to avoid a blow-up and a crisis.”‘

In other words, Israel is looking to achieve as little progress as possible towards peace whilst still maintaining its image as a peacemaker (hardly a new strategy).

Actually, I made a mistake in the above paragraph – we aren’t supposed to call it a “peace conference” any more. It’s a “summit”, apparently, or an “international meeting”. Furthermore, a recent directive from Olmert has instructed us that this “summit” will no longer produce a “declaration of principles”, but will rather settle for a “declaration of interests”. Translated from diplo-speak: the ’summit’ won’t mean shit.

Behind all this theatre remains the same basic problem: Israel rejects the international consensus two-state settlement (roughly, a withdrawal in exchange for peace). According to sources involved in the negotiations, Abbas is demanding:

‘- Settlements: Israel should declare an immediate freeze on construction in the settlements and quickly evacuate the outposts, as well as several settlements.

- Borders: The declaration should state that the future border will be based on the 1967 lines. Exchanges of territory will be limited to 2 or 3 percent of the West Bank in order to ensure territorial contiguity for the future Palestinian state and prevent the division of the West Bank into several cantons surrounded by settlements. The territory to be exchanged must be equal in quantity and quality.

According to another Palestinian proposal, instead of referring to borders, the declaration would refer to the area of the Palestinian state in the West Bank (about 6,500 square kilometers).

- Safe Passage: The Palestinian state should have a sovereign area that will be used for passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

- Jerusalem: East Jerusalem, including the Old City, should be the capital of the Palestinian state and under full Palestinian sovereignty.

- Refugees: Israel should recognize its responsibility for the suffering of the Palestinian refugees and compensate them.’

In other words, he’s demanding a two-state settlement based on international law and supported by the overwhelming majority of the international community. Alas, says Ha’aretz, “several of these demands are unacceptable to Israel”. This Israeli rejectionism is what is blocking a peace deal. For, once you set aside the flowery rhetoric, Israel’s true agenda is revealed by its actions on the ground:

‘The Samaria and Judea (Shai) District Police will move its headquarters to the controversial E-1 area, which links Jerusalem with the West Bank settlement of Ma’aleh Adumim, by the end of this year, regardless of whether or not the United States approves, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter told Haaretz this weekend.

For years, Israel has sought to develop E-1 in order to strengthen its hold on Ma’aleh Adumim, which is one of the largest settlements in the territories, and one that all Israeli governments have said they want to keep under any future agreement with the Palestinians. The area’s master plan therefore calls for constructing two new neighborhoods consisting of 3,500 houses in E-1. However, work on the houses was never initiated, and three years ago, Israel froze the plan completely due to international, and particularly American, opposition. Palestinians claim that Israeli territorial contiguity between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim would slice their future state in two.

They add that the plan would also isolate East Jerusalem from the rest of the planned state; the international community backs their objections.’

Filed under: Israeli / Palestinian, News and politics, US   |  Leave a Comment
Tags: "peace process", International & Foreign Policy