A RAY OF HOPE ?

After weeks of stagnation and verbal escalation, on the background of continued Israeli military aggression against Lebanon, negotiations on the Palestinian track have finally resumed. With a lot of help from our friends throughout the world, but mostly thanks to the American efforts and to European, Egyptian, Jordanian and Arab support, we have succeeded in convincing the Israelis that they could not continue to delay the implementation of signed agreements, pursue widespread settlement colonization, dictate the terms of a future peace settlement, and call it peace negotiations. No need to conceal it: the pulse of the Palestinian street, the extent of frustration at popular level, which the violent incidents of Birzeit university last month graphically illustrated, and Israeli security fears have played a role in this development. Let us be clear: our Israeli partners in the peace-process know we neither encourage, nor condone violence. But they have started to fear we might lose control. It is unfortunate that this process seems incapable of progress except through crises and under the objective threat of catastrophic scenarios.

So there will be a third phase of the second redeployment. It is not quite clear yet where, but Israeli officials say they will "try" and take Palestinian demands into consideration. And there will be a third redeployment, even though it is not clear where. And an agreement on the Northern "Safe Passage" seems imminent. Some of our prisoners will be released, as a gesture on the eve of the Feast of Sacrifice, and the Israelis have promised to hand over to the PNA the taxation and customs money they unduly withhold. A new May deadline has been set for the conclusion of a Framework Agreement on Permanent Status, but the September deadline to reach a final agreement has been confirmed and reaffirmed. The Palestinian leadership, on the other hand is committed to proclaim the sovereignty of the State of Palestine, whether there is an agreement or not, before the end of this year. Can such an agreement be reached ?

Needless to say, that what we want. And we shall do everything in our power to make it work. But we must also be realistic. The Israeli side has engaged in permanent status talk from a maximalist stand, and we fail to see the signs of a new flexibility: neither on the territorial issue, where Israel demands to annex half of the occupied Palestinian territory, nor on East-Jerusalem, which Barak reaffirms will remain under Israeli occupation, nor on the inalienable right of Palestinian Refugees to Return and compensation. The few experimental balloons periodically launched by the Israeli media (Labour MK Yossi Katz talking about the possible return of 100-150.000 refugees, or the present discussion on withdrawal from the villages of Abu Dis, Azare'a or El-Ram, which are outside the limits of the annexed municipality of Jerusalem) arouse vociferous opposition inside the Israeli political scene even before they can catch Palestinian attention. And the domestic difficulties of the fragile coalition on which Prime minister Barak has founded his government does not make it easier for him to take "painful decisions".

The futile attempt to play on the priority of the Syrian track has backfired on the Israeli government, which pays lip-service to parallelism and simultaneousness while losing precious time on both counts.

Will all this change before May ? Can it be solved, even on paper, until September? That is the challenge, and that is the question. For the peoples of our area, this is no theoretical question. It is a matter of life and death. The international moral balance of power in favour of Palestinian rights, the sole counterweight to Israeli military superiority on the ground, has been and remains, in this context, our best asset in the attempt to prevent the worst, and ensure the victory of Peace.

12.3.2000

The Editor