It?

By Ami Isseroff

The upcoming summit meeting could be “it:” the landmark event that will mark the real end of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the beginning of real peace. It could also be the beginning of a real disaster for both peoples if no agreement is reached.

Palestinian, Israeli and American leaders are meeting at Camp David for a last-ditch all out effort to reach a framework peace agreement and save the peace process before the Palestinians independently declare a state (or not) and before U.S. President Clinton leaves office. In preparation for the meeting, lower level talks are being held, perhaps at Camp David or elsewhere in the U.S. and perhaps at a few European capitals.

In the months and years prior to this summit, both sides have worked themselves into corners, with extremist declarations and acts, and both sides have also managed to maneuver themselves and the peace process into a Nadir of political popularity, partly because of factors unrelated to the peace process itself.

Israeli PM Barak has caused disillusionment and apathy the Israeli peace camp as well as disappointment on the Palestinian side. It began with his pre-election declarations that settlements such as Bethel and Ofra would be part of Israel for ever and ever. After election, he continued the policy of demolishing “illegal” Palestinian houses, though at a much reduced rate - just enough to be annoying, barbaric and immoral. He also continued building in the settlements at the same rate as the Netanyahu government. All of these actions were calculated to gain support of right-wing and middle of the road groups and did not really hurt his rating in the polls. However, Barak’s capitulation to religious demands of the Shas party lost him a great deal of support in the polls. There is reason to believe that his capitulation to the Shas party was done intentionally to weaken the Israeli left by forcing Meretz out of the government. The announcement of the summit caused two parties to leave the coalition. Right-Wing groups have been mobilizing widespread activities for weeks, including recruiting of children’s summer camps, to protest against the “danger” of peace, including any return of territories to the Palestinians and any possible dismantlement of settlements. There were the usual threats against PM Barak’s life, and at least one settler activist was caught with ominous looking plans of the route of Barak’s motorcade. The government has only now begun replying to the propaganda war of the right with a campaign of its own.

The Palestine National Authority has shown itself just as fully adept as the Israelis in flouting public opinion and sabotaging the peace process. Palestinians have become increasingly disillusioned with corruption in the government, and PNA Chairman Yasser Arafat and his government are easy targets of extremists who accuse them of corruption and of giving in to the Zionists on all points. Arafat and PNA/PLO leaders also helped alienate Israeli public opinion by organizing demonstrations against Israel that inevitably turned violent, with Israelis soldiers shooting at Molotov-cocktail and gun-toting “demonstrators” and PNA “police” sharpshooters shooting back at Israeli soldiers. More recently, Yasser Arafat and other leaders repeated that no territorial settlement other than return to the 1967 borders, a political and strategic impossibility from the Israeli standpoint, was possible.

A great obstacle to peace in Israel is fear, both real and imagined, of the Palestinian potential for violence if they are given a viable state. These very real concerns are exploited by a vocal minority who are interested, for their own purposes, in keeping Israeli settlements such as Yizhar, which are actually a strategic liability as well as a red flag for Palestinians.

A great obstacle to peace on both sides are the machines of hate, xenophobia and nationalism that have been built up over many years. There are considerable minorities who have vested interests in maintaining the status quo, and leaders on both sides found that they could not break totally with the past and these extremist groups. They tried to sell the peace process as a way of getting by peaceful means what could not be gained by military means, rather than as a vehicle for conciliation and compromise. Israeli leaders emphasized that settlements would become legalized. Palestinian leaders insisted that they will have a state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and many also hinted that this was only the first stage. PM Barak tried to sell the peace process with the slogan “Us here and them there,” the Israeli version of apartheidt. Little or no real dialog or understanding of the other side has taken place on either side. A sizeable group of Israelis still think the refugee problem will just go away if they only wish hard enough and that Israel can make peace with the Palestinians and still keep all of the settlements. Many also believe that the Oslo agreements were a mistake in principle, and that somehow, Israel can continue to rule millions of disenfranchised Palestinians. Equally dangerous delusions persist on the other side. A Palestinian “man in the street” interviewed by Israeli television said that Jerusalem is not really important to the Jews. Many refugees still believe that they can literally return to their homes, and many Palestinians have told me that they are for peace, but that there can only be peace without the “Zionists.”

Toward the final settlement, polarization has intensified. Voices for peace have been stilled, as each side tries to get the best “bargain” and those who object are labeled “traitors.” As though to sabotage the peace, each side has made public statements reiterating positions unacceptable to the other side, and has at the same time blamed the other side for sabotaging the prospects of peace.

Having put this machinery in motion, the leaders may find it hard to stop it. Both sides are making more preparations for a looming confrontation in September than they are for the possibility that they will have to sell a peace agreement to their peoples. Arab groups in the United States are preparing a refugee protest march for September 16, as though they know that outcome of the peace negotiations will be unacceptable.

Neither leadership has tried to sell peace to its public. Soldiers and terrorists are still big heroes on both sides, and compromise, reconciliation and peace are still dirty words in this part of the world Israeli PM Barak has at last, tentatively, begun to try and mobilize the peace movement in Israel and to invest in a public campaign to support a possible peace agreement, which must be ratified in a national referendum. However, this may be too little and too late.