Military

DATE=October 2, 2001

TYPE=Dateline

NUMBER=7-35373

TITLE=Is Middle East Peace Still Possible?

BYLINE=Judith Latham

TELEPHONE=619-3464

DATELINE=Washington

EDITOR=Neal Lavon

CONTENT=

INTRO: According to two major U-S newspapers, the Bush administration is considering how to revive a comprehensive Middle East peace initiative derailed by last month's terrorist attacks on the United States. Some regional analysts--as well as many Israelis and Palestinians themselves--are skeptical about the prospects for peace. Today's Dateline poses the question, in the wake of the events of the past three weeks, "Is Middle East Peace Still Possible?" Here's Judith Latham.

JL: The New York Times and the Washington Post say that part of the administration's plan for a comprehensive Middle East peace included U-S support for the creation of a Palestinian state. President Bush says a Palestinian state has always been part of America's vision for the Middle East so long as Israel's right to exist is respected.

Dennis Ross, former U-S envoy to the Middle East for 12 years, says that despite all the obstacles to an agreement, he never gave up hope that peace would ultimately prevail.

TAPE: CUT #1: ROSS Q&A [FM LATHAM] 4:16

"DR: On September 10, I was not optimistic in the near term, but I remained hopeful in the longer term. I say that because both sides haven't just lost trust and confidence in each other. They've lost fundamental faith in whether the other side is prepared to negotiate peace. The Israeli public looks at Yasser Arafat and is convinced he is incapable of negotiating peace and is basically uninterested in it. They believe they had a government that was extremely forthcoming, and the response to that government's readiness to consider far-reaching concessions was not only no but violence. On the Palestinian side, there's also a loss of faith. Palestinians on the street have seen a process that dragged on a long time, and they didn't see it ending Israeli control of their lives. They saw it cementing it. They constantly heard the grievances they felt were the Israelis' fault, and they were never told what was offered.

What was offered at Camp David was much more limited, but was offered by President Clinton in December. These ideas went very far towards addressing Palestinian aspirations. They would have produced an independent state in nearly all of the West Bank. Gaza would have been enlarged. The Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would have become the capital for that state. There would have been an international presence in the Jordan Valley, and there would have been a right of return for Palestinian refugees to their own state, but not to Israel. There would have been a structure created for dealing with compensation and dealing with claims. And Arafat couldn't accept it. That's something the Palestinian public has never been told. What they've seen since the beginning of the intifada in their eyes is an Israeli response to them in the use of force that treated them as if they were sub-human.

So, both sides have a fundamental doubt about whether they have a partner for peace. And to think you're going to move quickly toward peace is simply an illusion.

JL: But what impact do you think the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington will have on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? How does that change the equation?

DR: Things can change for the better if it's clear that terrorism is completely unacceptable, that it cannot be part of any equation, and it cannot be used to promote a cause. If there were to be a new understanding, and if it were clear that both sides should fulfil their obligations the Palestinians to stop the initiation of violence and the Israelis to lift the siege that the Palestinian territories are under then you might be able to establish a process where peaceful co-existence could become thinkable. But the most that is possible in the near term is to stabilize the situation, end the violence, and begin a process where peaceful coexistence is a legitimate objective for both sides.

I think the Palestinians have got to understand that they don't get rewarded for violence. Violence has set back their cause dramatically. The Israelis have to understand that there's no military solution and they're going to have to find a political solution over time. And not only do you see the two sides cooperating on security, but you also see both sides avoiding those steps that create a real grievance on the part of the other. In the case of the Palestinians, they stop the incitement. And on the Israeli side, they stop the confiscation of property, the demolition of houses, and the expansion of settlements. After that, you have to resume a political negotiating process.

Now I don't believe you're going to be able to resolve issues like Jerusalem and refugees any time soon, but I do think you can deal with issues like statehood and disengagement.

JL: Washington does seem to be much more engaged now than it was a month ago before the terrorists' attacks. You had made some recommendations about the things that Washington might do. What recommendations would you make today?

DR: I would like to see the United States construct a structure of accountability on commitments. As long as both sides know they won't be held to account on the commitments they make, the chances of those commitments being fulfilled are pretty low. And that means our being prepared to announce who is fulfilling and who isn't.

JL: What sort of pressure does the new environment place on the Sharon government?

DR: I think it creates more pressure on Arafat than on Sharon. Arafat does not want to look like he is part of the Osama bin Laden approach to the world. On the Sharon side, Sharon doesn't want to be in a position where it looks like he is an impediment to allowing the coalition to function. You have to understand that there is a lot more sympathy in this country for what Israel has had to contend with in the aftermath of September 11th than before. I mean terrorism is unacceptable."

JL: Former U-S Middle East envoy Dennis Ross is now President of the Middle East Institute. Robert Lieber, Professor of Government and Foreign Service at Georgetown University, says although both sides are now under pressure to negotiate, he questions whether anything much beyond a cease-fire is truly realistic.

TAPE: CUT #2: LIEBER [FM LATHAM] 1:10

"RL: The terrorist attack on America of September 11th and the reaction to it have put pressure on the parties to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to at least arrive at a cease-fire. I think there are not a lot of reasons for optimism about a real peace, but some cautious optimism about a cease-fire and about managing the conflict in ways that are less violent.

The cause of the violence has been a deliberate decision by Arafat and those around him to take violent action against Israel in the hope of changing the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian relationship, and that has failed at great cost in life and economic well-being to Arafat's own people. This is a way out for Arafat from an intifada he has been instrumental in, which has been damaging to himself and his cause. And, it creates an opportunity for him to de-escalate the violence that has not served him or his people very well.

To the extent there is less violence, the Israelis are likely to reduce their pressure on the Palestinians the economic embargoes, thereby making travel and communication easier and perhaps relaxing the economic environment."

JL: Professor Robert Lieber of Georgetown University. Edward Djerijian, Director of the Baker Institute at Rice University in Texas, describes the long-term prospects for peace in the Middle East as "credible," even though he says Israelis and Palestinians have "grown more distant from one another" over the past year.

TAPE: CUT #3: DJERIJIAN Q&A [FM LATHAM] 2:47

"ED: Nevertheless, given the fundamental reality that there is no military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and there is only a political solution, sooner or later the parties will have to find their way to the negotiating table once again. The tragedy was and is the number of people who had to die and be injured on both sides.

JL: How does the worldwide struggle against terrorism influence Washington's level of involvement in urging Israelis and Palestinians back to the negotiating table?

ED: I think it's become very clear that on September 11th a new page in the history of the United States was turned and in terms of the international community. This is going to be a long-term struggle that will incorporate everything from foreign policy to intelligence to security cooperation to conflict resolution to sanctions against states that harbor terrorists and up to and including military action where necessary. Given this turning point in our history, the Arab-Israeli conflict is one of those unresolved conflicts that only exacerbates the general situation. It is not the cause of the terrorism per se, but it is a contributing factor and provides an opportunity for extremists to prevail.

What you see with the U-S administration is that it is using all of its influence on both the Palestinians and the Israelis to cease the violence and to start talks. In this global campaign that the U-S is leading, the Israelis perceive that they must play their role in terms of facilitating the coalition building. It's very clear that Arafat and the Palestinian Authority do not want to be perceived as being on the wrong side of the fence in the global campaign against terrorism. So, it has become even more pressing for the Palestinian Authority to do everything possible to contain violence and to prevent any support for terrorist groups.

JL: In an ironic sort of way, do you see more hope now as the result of the terrorist attacks?

ED: I do believe in this wider context there are both dangers and opportunities. We saw what the dangers are in the World Trade Center and Pentagon. And the dangers are that there are more terrorists yet to be discovered, and therefore the threat remains. I think the opportunities are that countries will realize and parties to conflict will realize that, under the pressure of the world community, they are going to be influenced to try to settle these conflicts.

JL: Edward Djerijian, former U-S Ambassador to Syria and Israel and Deputy Secretary of State for Near East Affairs. "Is Middle East Peace Still Possible?" was the subject of today's Dateline. I'm Judith Latham.