by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright July 28, 2000
All Rights Reserved.

f I make concessions on Jerusalem," said the consumate survivor PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, "I will be killed, and you will have to talk with Sheik Yassin"—the spiritual leader of the militant Hamas organization. Summing up 14 draining days of round-the-clock negotiations, a bleary-eyed President Clinton threw up his hands, "God, it’s difficult," trying to honor the gag order but realizing that his hopes for a Mid-East legacy were coming unglued. Characterizing the summit as "a failure and stinging defeat" totally ignores the political realities involved in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conundrum. "Though the differences that remain are deep, they [Palestinians and Israelis] have come a long way," said a philosophical President Clinton, "Notwithstanding the failure to reach an agreement, they have made real headway in the last two weeks," trying to find a silver lining to the agonizing talks. While summit talks made high drama before both political conventions, few Mid-East experts expected a deal this time around. Considering the stakes for both Arafat and Barak, the discussions were surprisingly free of public acrimony.

       Unlike the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, Arafat knows the players and consequences of capitulation. When Sadat signed the historic Camp David Accords with Israel in 1979, he paid a draconian price, despite winning the Nobel Peace Prize with Menachem Begin. Begin also eventually paid a political price at the hands of Israel’s own right-wing fanatics. While hope springs eternal, few before the summit expected Israel or the PLO to cave-in on the pivotal Jerusalem issue. How many times have we heard that Jerusalem is Israel’s "eternal and undivided capital" or "a holy shrine" to Palistinians and Muslims? When Britain evacuated Palestine and Israel declared statehood in1948, East Jerusalem was under Jordanian Rule. Neither Palestinians nor Jews hold any exclusive claim to the ancient city of Jerusalem, only the world’s religious pilgrims have an 'eternal' claim. When pan-Arab forces threatened to evict Israel in 1967, Israelis captured Jordan’s West Bank, Egypt’s Gaza Strip, Syria’s Golan Heights and, yes, the Old City of Jerusalem. Creating a security buffer, Israel attempted to pad itself from its hostile Arab neighbors. Now most Israelis accept the land-for-peace concept—just not the Old City.

       Sure, there are countless references in the Old and New Testaments to Jerusalem and the people of Israel, but Muslims too make references in the Koran to Jerusalem as one of its holy sites. When the British territory Palestine was converted to the modern state of Israel in 1948, many Palestinians were displaced from their homes and property causing the current 52 year-old struggle to reclaim their land. Palestinian and Jewish refugee problems obviously predate the formation of Israel in 1948, but the armed guerilla struggle embodied in the PLO was chartered to destroy modern Israel. Only through President Carter’s 1979 Camp David Accords did the Egypt finally accept UN resolution 242, recognizing Israel’s right to exist. Most Arab countries still have trouble accepting UN resolution 242, despite the fact that Egypt signed its historic peace treaty with Israel in 1979. Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Jordan never got with the program, leaving Arafat in the unenviable position of placating too many people. When he embraces Muammar al-Quaddafi, Ayatollah Khomeini and other Muslim regimes, they’re still committed to ending Zionism. Showing weakness and looking like he’s pushed around by the U.S. or Israel incites more radicalism within the Muslim world.

       "We have done our best, out of a moral and personal and government responsibility, to do whatever we can to put an end to a conflict of 100 years," said Israeli Prime Minister Barak, "But unfortunately, in spite of being ready to touch the most sensitive nerves, we have ended with no results." While Barak made courageous concessions, he knew that they didn’t go far enough. "Prime minister Barak showed particular courage, vision and an understanding of the historic importance of this moment," said President Clinton, discounting too casually Arafat’s double-bind. Both Arafat and Barak haven’t caught up to the political realities of an acceptable Middle East peace. While Israelis would like to claim Jerusalem as its "eternal and undivided" capital, the reality is that neither side can support such claims. Beyond anything else, Arafat can’t save face without establishing East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital. Before the summit, Clinton, Barak and Arafat knew that the fate of Jerusalem was the major sticking point.

       Despite all his heroic efforts, President Clinton couldn’t pull a rabbit out of his hat, because Arafat simply couldn’t close a deal without sovereignty of East Jerusalem. Half-measures and concessions offering sovereignty of 'some' already occupied Arab areas of East Jerusalem didn’t meet the symbolic requirement of sovereignty of all East Jerusalem. When you consider that UN resolution 242 calls on Israel to return all of the territory captured during the 1967 Six-Day War, returning only East Jerusalem hardly sacrifices Israeli sovereignty or security. While the Wailing Wall in East Jerusalem is considered the Jews’ most sacred site, Israel must pick and choose its battles. Is preserving this religious shrine under Israeli control worth blowing a comprehensive Middle East peace? With over 60% of the Israelis regarding themselves as secular Jews, hanging on to the Wailing Wall may be more trouble than it’s worth.

       While Palestinians and Israelis are not yet up to speed on what it’s going to take to finally close the peace deal, both parties are still trying to hammer out a mutually acceptable compromise. Threatening to declare an independent state, Arafat hurts his cause by failing to admit who’s really calling the shots. Regardless of all the issues, Arafat must realize he’s still negotiating with the Middle East’s most powerful industrialized democracy. Israel’s willingness to make room for Palestinians isn’t based on threats from Arafat or anyone else. Few military experts doubt Israel’s ability to defend itself against any aggression. Barak’s humanitarian mandate from the Israeli people is to help resolve the painful nomadic plight of Palestinians. Avoiding incendiary rhetoric helps parties keep their eyes on the ball. Despite all the prophecies of doom and gloom, both parties must stop the huffing and puffing and finish the job.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for The Los Angeles Daily Journal. He’s director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in human behavior, health care, political research and media consultation. He’s the author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2000 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.