A Last Ditch Effort [Archives:2001/02/Focus]

COMMON SENSE
By: Hassan Al-Haifi
Perhaps one of the apparent traits of President William Clinton is that if he sets his mind on something, he will consider it a personal setback if he does not see it through. After eight years of seemingly endless unfruitful meetings, informal and non-formal chats, shuttle diplomacy and diplomatic get-togethers, it would seem that there is just no way that the quest for a final Middle East peace settlement can get out of the agendas of things to do for the Clinton Administration before packing its bags for the end of a successful Presidency, with many successful triumphs and accomplishments to garnish the Clinton Legacy. But anyone not used to feeling the itch of failure is bound to try to seek some way out of leaving the Middle East Peace process on hold for the next Administration to have to really start from scratch. That is probably what the Israelis were hopeful for anyway, believing at earlier stages that the Gore Lieberman Team would be just the right administration for such a termination of the most frustrating peace effort ever attempted.
But, perhaps Mr. Clintons perseverance, despite the stalling instigated by the Sharon visit to the Al-Haram Al-Sharif, subsequently leading to the latest Intifada, or civil protest by the Palestinians, is a sincere effort to insure that at least all the past years strides, if they may be called that, should not be thrown out the window, or to help facilitate the task somewhat for the incoming Bush Administration by at least setting a foundation stone from which the final talks could proceed accordingly. Thus, Mr. Clinton insisted on a last pressure cooker diplomatic effort to set the basis for the final settlement, based on some proposals worked out by the Clinton Administration, the terms of which are still publicly unclear, especially amidst the contradictory statements on these proposals coming out of both the Palestinian and the Israeli camps, none of which shed light on the full details of the proposals and what gains or concessions are to be perceived for both sides. In light of the short time span left for the Clinton Presidency and in view of the complexity of the issues involved, it would be difficult that any finale could be seen in the near horizon, especially as the statements coming from both sides have not shown any consistency of thought or feelings by many of the spokesmen who have aired their views about them.
As stated earlier, the Israelis are facing some very hard choices and maybe they are also confronted by some fundamental political developments that do not necessarily imply that the Israeli-American love affair has terminated, by any means, but surely is facing some serious groundwork for strategic planners on both the Arab and Israeli side. Of course, Israelis will be the quicker to realize this than their Arab counterparts. This entails the need for coping with new situations that may not be so favorable to the Israelis in the long run. This becomes evident, especially more so, when considering that the Sharon visit was based on the assumption that a Democratic Administration was to occupy the Executive Branch of the US Government, possibly with Joseph Lieberman well in line to be the next President of the United States, and thus providing greater support for any Israeli positions for at least the next eight years.
While no one expects a complete turnaround in the middle East policy of the United States in the Middle East by the Bush Administration, it is worth noting that the Bush Administration is under less pressure to accommodate the very strong Zionist lobby in the United States, especially as that lobby could not have been of any use to the Bush campaign, in the very edgy fight for the Presidential Office and may in fact have been very instrumental in coaxing the Al Gore Campaign to drag out the tough legal fight for the State of Florida Electors to the last minute decisive ruling of the US Supreme Court. Whatever the case may be, it is not hard to discern that the Bush Administration will carry on the Middle East policy with some variation to the theme, with Israel having to look for greater balancing support among the other institutions of American government through its faithful American Zionist lobby. But even that will be facing some difficulty, especially as the Intifada continues to tarnish the polished public media image, which the Israelis have long enjoyed in the Western Press, especially in the United States, where American public opinion has access now to wider channels of communications and coverage of the Middle East crisis and Israeli atrocities and arrogance have become standard news items, almost on a daily basis, most of which contradicts the heretofore David and Goliath myth and the image of the champion of human rights amidst hostile barbarians, by which the Arabs have been respectively characterized.
Therefore the Israelis are looking for some kind of a way out of the existing situation, which they created based on different arithmetic; i.e., the Intifada, but not really for a final settlement as Mr. Clinton might hope to reach. The Israelis want the Intifada to stop, by any means, but a final settlement is still far in the back of their minds, because they have yet to reach their final quest for the Promised Land of Eretz Israel, which they perceive to extend from the Nile to the Euphrates, if not beyond. That is why they have all those settlements dotted all over the West Bank and surely have no intention of abandoning, notwithstanding what might be jeopardized accordingly, unless they are literally compelled to do so by the United States the only force that decisively can influence Israeli political or strategic decisions, as was the case in Sinai, during the Camp David accords and the 1956 Arab Israeli (& British and French). For the Palestinians, a final settlement is, rightfully, a long sought quest, but how much more can a people give up, after having already lost so much and bore so much loss of life, agony, pride and whatever dignity was left after being victims of so many wars and occupations by so many different powers over the ages, none of which have reached the menacing ferocity and indiscriminate disregard for human rights, moral values and human dignity, as witnessed throughout the last century in the latest invasion by the Israelis, fostered and cradled by the very modern powers that claim to be the champions of human rights and civil liberties, namely Great Britain, as the initiator, and the United States, as the tireless sustainer and backer? Yet, given the present situation and the present global arena, and the poor policy and strategic thinking of the other Arab states and the lack of meaningful coordinated support of the latter, the Palestinians are also willing to assist the American Administrations, whether lame duck or just settling in office, as much as possible to realize their diplomatic successes, but how much can be compromised when you have to make decisions that are tied to emotional attachments, not just of Palestinians, but neighboring Arab States, and an entire World Moslem population, that has gone on record by declaring that sovereignty over Jerusalem is a decision that must be made, not just by the Palestine Liberation Organization, Chairman Yassir Arafat or even the Palestinians, but by a billion other Moslem and probably another billion Christian inhabitants of other parts of the Earth, who may not be keen on having the Holy City of Jerusalem under the sovereignty of a notorious vandalistic regime as the Zionist regime has proven to be so far.
Yet, the Israelis are expected to try to hold on to whatever concessions they have squeezed out of the Palestinians to date and want these to be the starting point of the next efforts to reach a final peace settlement, rather than to start all over again, under a Bush Administration, which has gone on record and stated during the political campaign for the Presidency that it will work for a just and final peaceful settlement of the Middle East problem, was a lot less than the what the platform of their competitors vied for continued and unquestioned support for the Zionist state, with the absence of the words, just, peaceful and final settlement in any of their speeches. Chances are that the tireless Mr. Clinton will have to do with the poor luck he had on the Middle East issue, but it is hoped that the American people will clearly realize now that, in the end, it was their spoiled friend that let them down, as usual, and not the Palestinian people who really have nothing else left to give up except their moral fiber and human dignity. The Israelis have already taken quite a lot of the latter.

——
[archive-e:02-v:2001-y:2001-d:2001-01-08-p:./2001/iss02/focus.htm]