The recently proposed "Road Map" peace plan has been met
with both criticism and support. Despite hopes to the
contrary, many doubt this latest effort will succeed where
others have failed so many times before. How is this plan
different from its predecessors? Is peace between
Israelis and Palestinians possible?
Déjà Vu All Over Again
With one exception this latest proposal is not dissimilar
to those offered during the Oslo era, from 1993 to 2000.
The major amendment in the current plan is the explicit
promise of a Palestinian state. This point was only implied
in the Oslo Accords, whereas now it's considered crucial to
the peace process. According to the White House, "the
Middle East road map makes clear that all sides must make
tangible immediate steps towards [a] two-state vision."1
The hope is that once Palestinians understand that they
will receive their own state, they will be more likely to
make a deal.
Although the issue of a Palestinian state is indeed
crucial to the peace process, it is not as straightforward
or easy as some believe. The creation of a Palestinian
state would mean that Israeli presence in the disputed areas
would have to end. Israelis living in settlements in
the Gaza Strip would have to leave, and Israeli outposts
would have to be dismantled. It is a sensitive issue,
especially to those currently living in the settlements,
many of whom have declared that they will never move from
their homes.
Yet another setback to the road map is how the terms of
the peace plan will be communicated to the Palestinian
people. Many of us witnessed the vast contrast between
Western media coverage of the war in Iraq and reports given
by Arab stations such as Al Jazeera and Abu Dhabi.
Whatever terms are proposed must first be filtered through
the Palestinian leadership. Despite Prime Minister Abu
Mazen's good intentions, he is not the only one trying to
persuade the Palestinian people. Yasser Arafat, the
Palestinian media, the Fatah leadership, Islamic clerics,
Hamas, and many others exhibit influence over public
opinion. After the Aqaba summit, Abu Mazen was painted
by many of his own colleagues as betraying the Palestinian
people.
The creation of a Palestinian state is not the only
requirement; if that were the case the conflict could have
been solved long ago. In 1947, the United Nations
stepped in and voted to partition Palestine into two
separate states - one Palestinian and one Jewish.
The Jews were not happy with the partition plan but
agreed to the compromise. The Arabs, however, maintained an
all-or-nothing position and refused to accept the UN's plan.
Had they agreed, the Palestinians would have had their state
in 1947. The opportunity for an independent state arose
again more recently in 2000.
So why hasn't an agreement been reached?
The terms the Palestinians get in creating their own
state seem to be as important as the state itself.
Palestinian leadership has ardently resisted making any
concessions toward Israel. Palestinians have demanded
all of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem, as
well as the right for all Palestinian refugees and their
descendants to return to Israel.
Of these, the demand for "right of return" is a
particularly sensitive issue.
| The Pew Global Attitudes Project
surveyed 16,000 people in 20 countries and the
Palestinian Authority in May, 2003.2
"Among other things, the postwar survey asked
people their views on the conflict between the
Israelis and Palestinians. By wide margins, most
Muslim populations doubt that a way can be found
for the state of Israel to exist so that the
rights and needs of the Palestinian people are
met.
"Eight-in-ten residents of the Palestinian
Authority express this opinion. But Arabs in
Israel, who voice the same criticisms of U.S.
policy in the Middle East as do other Muslims,
generally believe that a way can be found for
the state of Israel to exist so that Palestinian
rights and needs are addressed. In fact, Arabs
in Israel are nearly as likely as Jews to hold
that opinion (62% of Arabs, 68% of Jews).
Outside of the Muslim world, there is general
agreement that there is a way to ensure Israel's
existence and meet the needs of Palestinians.
This view is widely shared in North America and
Western Europe." |
A "Historic Palestinian Homeland" Isn't Exactly
Historic
Contrary to popular belief, there has never been a
country of Palestine ruled by Palestinians. The Romans
originally called the area Judea, but around A.D. 135 they
renamed it "Palaestina" - presumably after Israel's enemies,
the Philistines. After the Romans, the area was controlled,
in succession, by the Byzantine Empire, Arabia, the Seljuk
Turks, Mameluke forces from Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, and
the British.
For hundreds of years, Palestine was a miserable backwash
part of the Ottoman Empire. Poor administration practices by
the Empire and a war with the invader Napoleon in 1798
severely reduced the population of Palestine. Both Arabs and
Jews emigrated to happier locations and only a dismal,
scattered population was left. In his book, Innocent's
Abroad (1869), Mark Twain repeatedly notes how empty
and desolate he found the Holy Land during his travels
there. Even Jerusalem held a population of only 14,000
people, and Twain noted there was great variety in those
14,000, including, "Muslims, Jews, Greeks, Latins,
Armenians, Syrians, Copts, Abyssinians, Greek Catholics, and
a handful of Protestants." It wasn't until the last part of
the 19th century that the Arab population started growing
again.
Demand for Palestinians' "right of return" will never be
voluntarily accepted by Israel, making the peace process a
complex and seemingly impossible task.
For most Westerners it is difficult to understand why the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict has persisted for so long or
why it has fueled so much violence. But in looking at
a recent global survey by the Pew Research center the reason
seems remarkably clear. The study reported that "by
wide margins, most Muslim nations doubt that a way can be
found for the state of Israel to exist so that the rights
and needs of Palestinian people are met." (See sidebar at
right.)
This is the main roadblock to peace in the Middle East:
too few Palestinians truly desire it. Since its creation,
Arab groups have fought for the elimination of the State of
Israel. Most Arab nations have yet to officially recognize
the right of Israel to exist, and many Muslim groups, like
Hamas and Hezbollah, will not allow peace unless it comes in
the form of Israel's destruction.
In the schools, Palestinian children are consistently
taught to hate Israel and not to seek and pursue peace. The
Palestinian leadership has long condoned terrorism against
Israeli civilians. Peace proposals have been answered with
greater numbers of terrorist attacks. When former Israeli
Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the most far-reaching
concessions ever, Yasser Arafat rejected them and the 2000
intifada started shortly thereafter. Until the
Palestinians' desire for true peace is stronger than the
efforts of the terrorists, no "Road Map" will work.
* * *