Today's Situation

A summit in the offing? Monday, May 22, 2006

Olmert could use a summit to prove the basic political theory behind the election campaign he won just a little more than a month ago: to prove that the Palestinians are incapable of producing a ‘partner’ with whom Israel can negotiate a peace agreement. He’s in Washington this week for the first time as prime minister, and has already been told that the Americans are much less interested in his ‘convergence’ plan than they are in what Israel plans to do to help calm things down in Gaza, where Hamas and Fateh seem on the verge of civil war, a war that most observers now seem to agree Hamas would likely come out the victor as the better organized of the two sides. That chaos, combined with Hamas’ ‘lead’ in what one columnist describes today as a deterioration toward a Somalia-like ‘civil war’ is part of Olmert’s proof to the Americans that Israel’s only choice is a unilateral move, something the Americans, let alone the Europeans and Arabs, are loathe to accept. A summit, particularly one in which he does not have to face Abbas alone, thus granting the PA premier too much credit, would, by Olmert’s thinking, help his efforts to persuade the world, let alone Israelis, that despite all his goodwill, Abbas is not capable of delivering a peace deal.

Abbas, for his part, could use a summit to shore up his battered image as the moderate Palestinian leader who has never used his authority to crack down on rogue gunmen. He has made avoiding civil war his top priority, even as he tries to persuade Hamas that the only reasonable course for the Palestinians if they want international aid, let alone international support for their demands that Israel withdraw from the West Bank, is to accept the international conditions laid down by the Quartet and Abbas: recognize Israel, recognize past PA international agreements, and renounce terrorism. Hamas is still refusing to do so. A summit would at least give Abbas the sheen of international legitimacy, if that holds any sway nowadays in Palestine, which on Thursday is slated to begin 10 days of ‘national discussion,’ a dialogue between all the political parties about the direction the Palestinian national liberation movement should take. In many ways, the showdown between the Hamas militia, which was deputized as an ‘auxiliary police’ service by the Palestinian interior minister, and the PA’s armed forces, ostensibly under Abbas’ control as president, is a prelude to that national debate, and the efforts being made now are to prevent the still sporadic violence from taking over the street, and putting an end to the dialogue.

Mubarak could use a summit to recast his role as a powerbroker in the region. Ariel Sharon’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza gave Egypt a role -- beefed up Egyptian police on the border with Gaza and control over the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing. But Sharon’s refusal to engage Abbas in substantive dialogue, before, during or after the Gaza withdrawal -- which Sharon largely cast as a form of Israeli retribution for Palestinian unwillingness or inability to halt terrorism -- sidelined Mubarak. True, Sharon and Mubarak developed a relatively strong relationship after initial mutual suspicion, but Sharon’s basic mistrust of any formal agreement with the Arabs overshadowed the relationship. Mubarak, under international criticism for his not-far-enough moves toward democracy, and under domestic pressure for his crackdowns on the opposition, could shore up his credentials as a peacemaker, if he could somehow get Olmert and Abbas to reach some form of agreement on something.

Judging from the meeting yesterday in Sharm el Sheikh, there might be some small minor agreements that are possible. Israel and Abbas’ office are supposedly working out a mechanism to transfer NIS 50 million in medical aid to Gaza. Optimistic reporters called it the opening of the channel to bypass Hamas. That could be an opening for Israel to figure out ways to apply more of the $50 million a month it ostensibly collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority and has frozen since Hamas took over, to ‘humanitarian aid.’ It will certainly take a lot more than NIS 50 million (about $10 million) to help Abbas assert his control over the Palestinian Authority.

The Israelis have given up on Abbas -- but the Americans and Europeans have not. Indeed, even the Palestinians seemingly have not given up on Abbas. Polls still show Abbas’ pro-negotiations position to be the most popular political position among Palestinians, with the two state solution, which Hamas meanwhile officially rejects, as their choice. Israel has officially accepted the two-state solution, but there are profound questions about what it means by a Palestinian state and what even moderate Palestinians have in mind. Indeed, it is that gap, which Israelis assume exist, that makes Olmert’s ‘no partner’ policy so popular in Israel. A summit could at the very least make clear to Israelis what positions Abbas holds on the issues -- with right of return for refugees at the top of the list. But if attorney Olmert goes to a summit determined to prove Abbas is no partner, nothing will prevent the summit from becoming a failure.

Today's Situation || Yesterday's Situation