|
PEACEWatch |
|
| Brilliant
Tactics
Ami Isseroff |
||
| This column is called PeaceWatch, but this week it seemed that there was
precious little peace to watch. To meet pressure from the U.S. and from the majority of
the Israeli population, PM Netanyahu undertook the Wye Plantation agreements. To meet
pressure from right-wing coalition members, Netanyahu undertook to torpedo the agreements,
by carrying out house demolitions and land expropriations, and by putting the narrowest
possible interpretation on prisoner release clauses. Netanyahu’s tactics almost worked. Despite a flubbed tragicomic attempt to include David Levy and his Gesher party in the coalition, Bibi’s government survived a crucial Knesset session, postponing a vote on early elections that the government would have lost. Prior to the vote, the government announced that it was postponing implementation of the Wye agreement, using as an excuse the near-lynch of an AWOL Israeli soldier who happened on a demonstration. This announcement brought the government some support from the right-wing NRP party, but it was not enough to save the government. On the day of the vote, Foreign Minister Sharon’s office floated a false rumor that he had told Madeleine Albright that Israel was stopping implementation of the Wye agreements because of Palestinian violations. That was not enough to persuade right-wing Knesset members to vote for the government either. In the end, Bibi survived by making the vote a vote of confidence, and postponing it for two weeks. In that time, perhaps Israel will complete the next redeployment according to the Wye agreements. Right-wing coalition members would then have no motivation for bringing down the government in order to postpone redeployment. Or perhaps Bibi will succeed in killing the peace process entirely, winning back the disaffected right wing. Reality, however, is not the inside of the Knesset and the limousines of the government members. The brilliant political maneuvering came at the expense of that reality. Frustrated by Israeli go-slow policies in implementing the peace process, Palestinians have begun to react. Ostensibly the issue is release of political prisoners, but as usual, the ostensible issue is not necessarily the real one. A week of rioting has preceded President Clinton’s visit to Palestine and Israel, intended to accompany the cancellation of the offending sections of the Palestinian covenant and accompany the next stage of redeployment. The riots brought the predictable violent Israeli reaction. In Ramallah, fire from Israeli forces killed a young man, an occasion for more riots and more violent repression. PNA police were active in putting down riots, but that did not prevent the Israeli government and right-wing Knesset members from claiming that the riots were PNA-instigated violations of the Wye accords. ‘Objectively,’ there is progress. The Palestinians have opened their airport. The Israelis implemented a partial withdrawal. Palestinian police and security forces have helped to put down disturbances and to round up those responsible for the lynch. Israel released some political prisoners, the Fatah Executive Council approved the elimination of anti-Israel clauses in the covenant. These ‘objective’ signs of progress should have been greeted with enthusiasm and hope by those anxious for peace. Instead, they have been obscured by a chorus of extremists who insist on pointing out what has not been done. Israel has not released enough political prisoners, Israel is expropriating land, the Palestinians did not condemn the riots strongly enough, the Palestinians are preparing anti-Israeli laws, the covenant must be cancelled by the PNC and so on. So, as the peace process proceeds, the perception of the man in the street is that things are getting worse. The Israeli government and the Palestinians have adopted a bizarre method of conducting negotiations. Instead of the real issues, each side negotiates for what they thing they can get. This allows them to point out their ‘achievements’ to their constituencies. In place of a freeze on settlement expansion and house demolitions, the Palestinians got an airport and freeing of a few political prisoners. Instead of a real guarantee that Israeli withdrawals would eventually bring reconciliation, the Israelis got President Clinton to promise to review the case of Jonathan Pollard, and also got the worthless ceremony that will be conducted in Gaza next week. In this way both sides have achieved a great many things, but they have not achieved peace. Now President Clinton is coming. Suddenly, miraculously, everything has become quiet. The sides will meet, perhaps the differences will be resolved - or dissolved in ambiguity - under American pressure, and perhaps there will be a bit more objective progress. The model for negotiation of the final settlement is thus already in place, but it is a recipe for failure. The peace must be made in the Middle East, by the people of the Middle East, not imposed from the outside. A foreign power can force redeployments and release of prisoners and perhaps votes in the Palestinian National Council, but a foreign power cannot force peace. The negotiating methods of both sides are great tactics, but terrible strategy. Both sides will be forced to acquiesce, but not to agree. They will do the right thing, but virtue will not be rewarded. The Palestinians will have openly renounced their ambitions of eliminating the ‘Zionist entity,’ but will have no solution to the refugee problem and to their pressing economic problems. Israel will withdraw from much of the territory of the West Bank, without gaining peace with the Palestinians or its Arab neighbors. By their ‘brilliant tactics’ each side will win many small battles and have many ‘achievements,’ but both sides may lose the peace ‘war.’ Ami Isseroff Rehovoth |
||
| Copyright 1998 by the authors and the PEACE group. May be reproduced intact provided that credit is given to the authors, and to the PEACE Mid-East Dialog Group, including addresses listed at the bottom. | ||
