Military

DATE=3/29/02

TYPE=INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

TITLE=JENTLESON

NUMBER=3-110

BYLINE=TOM CROSBY

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

INTERNET=YES

HOST: After an all-night special session of his security cabinet, Mr. Sharon promised that Mr. Arafat will be completely isolated, and that Israeli forces will carry out widespread operations to end Palestinian terrorism. A spokesman for Mr. Sharon (Ranaan Gissin) accused Mr. Arafat of inciting young Palestinians to become suicide bombers but he denied that Israel is trying to kill Mr. Arafat. Palestinian radio says Mr. Arafat's Fatah faction has called on Palestinian gunmen to take the fight to Israel. The Israeli cabinet meeting came shortly after Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said he has notified U-S Mideast envoy Anthony Zinni he is ready to implement, without any conditions, a U-S cease-fire plan. Israeli officials discounted Mr. Arafat's commitment, saying he has made similar statements in the past.

Bruce Jentleson says prospects for achieving a ceasefire are in doubt. Mister Jentleson heads the Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy at Duke University in North Carolina and was a foreign policy advisor to Senator...and later... Vice-President Al Gore. As part of the State Department Policy Planning Staff during the Clinton administration...he was a member of the U-S delegation to the Middle East Multilateral Arms Control and Regional Security Talks.

MR. JENTLESON: A cease-fire can hold if there is genuine will and commitment to try to make it hold. There has been a lot of discussion on the part of the United States, as well as the Israelis, to seeing much more of an effort on the part of Chairman Arafat. And I think to the extent that you genuinely believe the effort is being made, and if some incidents still happen, they have a very different meaning than if there is real strong doubts about whether a serious effort is being made.

MR. CROSBY: Against this backdrop, of course, we've had the Arab League Summit in Beirut, which endorsed a Saudi peace plan for the Israelis and Palestinians. Is that a hopeful thing as far as you are concerned, or is that still up in the air, very much in doubt?

MR. JENTLESON: I think it seemed to be a step in the right direction, and then, in the end, it seemed to be at least a half a step backwards. The summit seemed to end without any official declaration of what the statement really means. Some of the language was changed in crucial ways, from "normalization," which has a particular meaning in diplomatic parlance, to "normal." And I think it is very crucial that the United States now work with the Saudis to determine what really lies there, and to see if some of the ambiguities of that declaration can be fleshed out in a pro-peace direction.

MR. CROSBY: The flipside of that is how will Ariel Sharon react to the declaration?

MR. JENTLESON: I think Sharon already stated that it's a nonstarter. I think that is going too far. I think any effort by the Arab League to try to move towards support for the peace process at least has to be explored. But I think it can't be taken just at face value. I think it has to be determined: Why was there this change of language? Is this to give just the appearance of being accepting of Israel, or would it genuinely lead to the reality?

And also I think the whole issue of refugees and right of return -- there is no question about the right of return to the West Bank and Gaza. And I think there is no question about compensation, economic compensation, for Palestinian refugees, that go back to the 1948 conflict. But it has to be very clear that the right of return does not apply to Israel proper. The whole point of peace is to establish Israel as a secure and Jewish state in the region. And it's just not viable to do that if you started to open up the door of right of return as applied to Israel proper.

MR. CROSBY: Further, do you see Israel pulling back at all, as proposed by the Arabs, to its pre-1967 borders?

MR. JENTLESON: The Camp David process, back in the year 2000, made an effort to do that. The basic terms of the deal are land for peace. There is nothing, nor is there anything in U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, that absolutely says it has to be the exact map that was there in early June 1967. I think those are issues that can be worked out if the will to have a peace agreement is there on both sides.

HOST: Duke University's Bruce Jentleson, a one-time foreign policy advisor to former Vice President Al Gore. He was speaking with News Now's Tom Crosby.