|
Peace Plan Has Already Had an Impact
By Shibley Telhami
San Jose Mercury (Perspective Section)
March 3, 2002
SAUDI "VISION” OFFERS NEW INCENTIVES, A NEW PLAYER AND A
CHANCE TO HALT VIOLENT CYCLE
Daily news reports from the Middle East have taken on a
grim sameness; they are recitations of the deadly tit for
tat we've come to expect over the past several months.
Last week was, in some ways, no different. A 15-year-old
Palestinian girl rushed at Israeli soldiers with a knife
and was killed. Three pregnant women, two Palestinian and
one Israeli, were shot. And Israeli tanks carried out
major assaults in two Palestinian refugee camps.
But even as the casualties mounted, so did interest in
... and support for ... what has been termed the "Saudi
plan'' for Middle East peace. On one level, the intense
interest is puzzling. To begin with, the "plan'' is
nothing formal. Its general outline was presented in a
column by the influential New York Times writer Thomas
Friedman. He reported that Crown Prince Abdullah was
considering making a speech at the upcoming Arab Summit
that would suggest offering full peace between the Arab
world and Israel if Israel would fully withdraw from the
territories it occupied in the 1967 war.
Even if the crown prince does give the speech, the
likelihood that this public Saudi position would quickly
be translated into a settlement of the Arab-Israeli
conflict is remote. The initiative is, nonetheless, very
important and is generating excitement, in part, for what
it has already accomplished.
First, the initiative immediately changed the discourse
within the Middle East.
For months now, the rhetoric in the region has hardened
in the face of a tragic cycle of violence that has
victimized Palestinians and Israelis. In the Palestinian
areas, a sense of helplessness and humiliation is greater
today than ever before. And for Israelis, the sense of
insecurity and hopelessness about the prospects for peace
is also greater than before.
In this environment, it is easy to understand why
militant voices are the ones that dominate the debate and
why moderates go silent, or sometimes even echo the voices
of the militants.
Debate Shifts
Suddenly, the very prospect of a peaceful way out has
changed the debate. The front-page stories in Middle
Eastern newspapers are focused on the possibility of
reviving a peace process. And moderate voices, desperate
for an opportunity to be heard, are now more vocal in
Israel and the Arab world.
Because the initiative is being floated by Saudi
Arabia, it is especially important in the Arab world. The
country has strong Arab and Islamic credentials; its
stance is important not only in affecting public
perceptions, but also in influencing the positions of
other Arab governments.
The mere fact that the Saudis are voicing a potential
acceptance of Israel and normal relations with the Arab
world is important for moving public opinion, especially
at a time when much of the rhetoric is more about war.
Other Arab governments, meanwhile, are often swayed by
Saudi Arabia's considerable political clout. Some Arab
countries also find it hard to oppose the Saudis because
the country provides important economic support to them.
The second major benefit of the Saudi initiative is
that it brings a new player into the mix. It has become
clear over the past year that the level of trust between
Israelis and Palestinians is so low that they are unlikely
to be able to break out of the cycle of violence on their
own.
If history is any guide, movement is much more likely
to occur because of an outside intervention. I and three
fellow professors recently published findings from
studying twenty 20 years of daily interactions in the
Middle East. What we found is that, over time, the parties
normalized reciprocity and continued to respond in kind to
the other parties' actions, even if the outcome was
destructive for both. They didn't seem to learn from the
pain they suffered or to recognize that since violence
hasn't worked, they should try cooperation instead.
Intervention works
What has driven the Israelis and Palestinians to the
negotiating table in the past was external diplomatic
intervention, rare courageous leadership, or dramatic
changes in the incentives available to the parties.
In this case, a possible Saudi role in negotiations,
especially if backed by other Arab states, offers new
incentives. For Israel, the incentive to talk is that it
could gain acceptance among Arabs at a time when Israelis
believe many Arabs are out to destroy the country. For
Palestinians, the support of other Arab states would be
empowering, especially on issues that are important not
only to Palestinians but to other Arabs and Muslims, such
as Jerusalem. They would thus know that once they
negotiate a deal on these issues, they will have the
support of the Arab world.
And for the American mediators, who had been running
out of options, the incentives offered by broad Arab
cooperation open new possibilities: The United States
could now coordinate with Saudi Arabia and other countries
to offer Israelis and Palestinians a vision of peace that
contrasts with today's painful realities.
A third benefit of Crown Prince Abdullah's initiative
is that it begins a process of improving the Saudi-U.S.
relationship after months of strain following the tragedy
of Sept. 11 and the discovery that many of the
perpetrators were Saudi citizens. While this initiative
alone will not repair the harm done to the relationship,
it should certainly begin to change some Americans'
perceptions that Saudi Arabia is unwilling to play a
constructive role in brokering Arab-Israeli peace.
American diplomats have been critical of Arab states,
especially since the collapse of the Camp David
negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in July
2000, arguing that the states were not providing enough
support for peacemaking.
While this initiative ... or more appropriately
""vision'' ... that the Saudis have put forth is thus a
very important step in an otherwise depressing climate, it
merely opens an opportunity to be exploited. The obstacles
remain great.
Necessary first step
The cycle of violence between Israelis and
Palestinians has to be broken before anyone can pursue
serious negotiations about a final settlement. And the
objectives of the Palestinian and Israeli leaders, neither
of whom can be ignored, are anything but harmonious.
Israel remains opposed to the full withdrawal that the
Saudi plan suggests, and the Saudis said nothing about the
issue of the right of return of Palestinian refugees.
Finally, it is not clear that the Bush administration
believes that the environment is ripe enough for the sort
of diplomatic push that would be required to begin working
toward the comprehensive peace envisioned by the Saudi
proposal.
The United States has played an important role in every
successful Arab-Israeli peace negotiation in the past
three decades, and its role remains important today.
The task of peacemaking, therefore, remains daunting.
But, for now, every bit of hope helps.
SHIBLEY TELHAMI is the Anwar Sadat professor for peace
and development at the University of Maryland and a
non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
His newest book, co-edited with Michael Barnett, is
"Identity and Foreign Policy in the Middle East.'' Telhami
wrote this article for Perspective.
Copyright © 2002,
San Jose Mercury
|
