ULIAN BORGER: The arrival of a Palestinian state 1998 Scripps Howard
JERUSALEM (August 31, 1998 11:02 a.m.)
In just over eight months' time another explosion is primed to go off in the Middle East. Clear warnings have been issued giving the precise time and place, but so far very little is being done to prevent it. The West's current policy is to hope it doesn't go off with too much of a bang.
The bomb in question is the declaration of a Palestinian state planned for May 4, 1999. Yasser Arafat insists that -- barring a miraculous turnaround in the state of Israeli-Palestinian relations -- such a state will come into being in Gaza and the West Bank, with its capital in Jerusalem.
The target date marks the expiry of the transitional period laid down in the Oslo peace accords. After that date, Arafat argues, Oslo rules cease to apply and the Palestinian people will be free to pursue
self-determination.
The Palestinian state is Israel's unborn twin. The thinking behind peace efforts stretching from the U.N.'s 1947 partition plan to the 1993 Oslo accords is that both siblings must claim a separate existence in order for a lasting peace to settle on the Middle East.
In practice, Palestine will probably be born in confusion. Arafat's Palestinian Authority currently has full control over only two-thirds of the slender Gaza Strip and 3 percent of the West Bank. In these tiny enclaves, flags will be raised, honor guards will march up and down, stamps will be issued.
But the lightly armed Palestinian police force (numbering 30,000 or 40,000 depending on whose figures you believe) will be in no position to wrest control of the rest of the occupied territories in the face of resistance of Israel's formidable army.
If Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing coalition is still in power, it will be tempted to annex the lion's share of the occupied territories, in response to the inevitable cries for help from the settlers.
Past experience suggests Netanyahu would exploit Oslo's demise by channeling even more funds to the settlers and sealing the Palestinians up inside their Bantustan-style enclaves. In areas currently under joint Israeli-Palestinian control, clashes would be virtually inevitable.
Whichever way it plays out, a unilateral declaration of statehood is likely to cause blood to flow, most of it Palestinian. The rest of the world would then be presented with the problem of recognition. The hope commonly expressed by U.S. and British diplomats is that Arafat can be bullied into putting off his declaration, sparing them the quandary of a decision next May.
That hope is not entirely groundless. Palestinian officials say that Arafat would willingly defer statehood if there were signs of serious progress in handing over the West Bank in accordance with Oslo, and some hope of compromise over the main outstanding issues -- the fate of Jerusalem, the Palestinian refugees and the Jewish settlements. Failing such a dramatic turnaround, Arafat would have little hope but to make good on his pledge.
But the drift of current events is not encouraging. Even if there is formal agreement in the next few days over troop withdrawals, their implementation will no doubt be a drawn-out and painful affair. Meanwhile the accelerating spread of West Bank settlements, spurred on by government subsidies, makes a final territorial agreement increasingly unlikely.
Public-opinion surveys consistently show a majority of Israelis would willingly cede Gaza and the West Bank, even witness the creation of a Palestinian state, in return for a stable peace.
But few want to watch fellow Jews forcibly removed from their homes to make way for such a state. A viable Palestine gets further away with each new settler home. Probably more than half the 160,000
Jewish settlers are in the occupied territories simply because they are cheaper than Israel. They would probably move if compensated. The rest are led by a hard core of right-wing ideologues.
This motley group is pinning Israel down in the territories against the national will, and -- through the deployment of its extremely effective lobby -- Israel, in turn, has tied Washington's hands in the pursuit of a balanced Middle East policy.
This is the real tail wagging the White House dog, with hugely damaging consequences for the United States and its allies. It is a primary reason why the United States and Britain are at the top of every Islamic terrorist's list of targets.
If the Oslo agreements are to survive another year, they need a show of muscular international support now to counteract the influence of the settlers, even if backing Oslo necessitates the threat of sanctions against the Netanyahu government. The alternative is the premature and bloody delivery of a half-formed Palestine next May. |
