 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 20 - 26 July 2000 Issue No. 491 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 20 - 26 July 2000 Issue No. 491
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Features Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Full deal, or no deal
By Hoda Tawfik
President Bill Clinton decided to delay his departure for Japan for one day and continue his round-the-clock efforts to broker a peace agreement between the Palestinians and Israel. The White House announcement was made after midnight Tuesday, shortly before Clinton's scheduled departure yesterday morning.
"The president believes this is in the best interest of the Middle East peace process," said White House spokesman Joe Lockhart. This was a dramatic reversal of previous statements that Clinton was determined to leave for an economic summit in Japan on schedule.
The peace talks foundered on the issue of Jerusalem -- the holy city of the three main monotheistic religions, which Israel claims as its "eternal capital," and the Palestinians want as the capital of their independent state.
Iyad Sarraj, Palestinian commissioner for citizens' rights, said that "no Palestinian leader can go back to the Palestinians, to the Arabs and Muslims, and say that 'I've come back to you without Jerusalem.' This is impossible."
Indeed, Yasser Arafat put up a fight, rejecting the offers made by Prime Minister Ehud Barak, such as trading Palestinian land in the West Bank for Palestinian land in Jerusalem.
Professor Rashid Khalidi, a prominent Palestinian scholar, said that "were Arafat to sign a piece of paper in Camp David stating that the conflict is over, it will not be over; the paper will be worthless."
Khalidi wondered how the Israelis can coexist with the Palestinians and not give them sovereignty over the city they consider their capital. "The Israelis want it both ways. They want no more claims, and they also want the land," he said.
He reminded American brokers that Palestinian public opinion was not exactly enchanted with the deal Arafat made in Oslo. "Arafat wouldn't have a great deal to lose if he didn't sign on," Khalidi said. "I think Arafat is the one of the three leaders who can go home after a failure and say 'I did the best I could do,' and he will wait for another Israeli prime minister and a new administration in America." But Khalidi is "not sure that Arafat will do that."
Clinton pressed the parties to reach agreement on the final status issues: Jerusalem, settlements, refugees, land and security. He kept the negotiators awake for three consecutive nights and, wielding the deadline to turn up the heat, reminded them that he was leaving for Japan, and that he wanted a deal by the time he left. Abu Alaa, a Palestinian negotiator, said there will either be "a deal on all the issues, or nothing at all."
The White House spokesman maintained the tone of urgency at press briefings, using phrases such as "the summit is not open-ended" and it "cannot go on for an unlimited time." By Tuesday night, however, there was still no deal, and Clinton was unable to move either Barak or Arafat on the fateful issues. Anxious that an agreement be reached, he gave himself another 24 hours.
"They are hard at work," said P J Crowley, spokesman for the National Security Council. "The atmosphere at times has been tense, but they are still working on it," said Lockhart.
Did any of the sides threaten to walk out? Lockhart responded: "Boy, it would be a long walk. I mean, you have to go all the way down the mountain."
The media had no choice but to wait and see. The only tip the White House gave the journalists loitering patiently at a press centre five miles away from Camp David was that Clinton would have something to say before his departure.
Will Clinton announce a deal, or simply make a statement? Nobody knows for sure. It all depends on the final hours of negotiations and the pressure, bargains and compromises.
Clinton, seeking a foreign policy triumph before he leaves office next January, hopes the summit will crown his efforts at "Camp Clinton," as reporters have dubbed the Maryland retreat.
His decision to extent the summit for a ninth day shows his eagerness to reach a final status accord that would resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and eliminate all claims. But can Arafat comply? "There are requirements for peace, it is not a concession bestowed by the strong on the weak; it is not a result of an imposed or a faulty agreement, but rather [of] dealing with the causes of conflict," said Palestinian spokesperson Hanan Ashrawi after a meeting with Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The latest reports referred to a continuing deadlock, particularly since there have been no bilateral talks between Arafat and Barak in the past couple of days.
In a letter to the Washington Post, Arab League Ambassador Hussein Hassouna warned against a summit deal that would only be a prelude for continued conflict. He wrote: "By all accounts, the outcome of the Camp David Palestinian-Israeli summit is fraught with doubts and uncertainties; will it open the door to a historical reconciliation, or will it mark the prelude of renewed hostility and instability in the region?"
In order to succeed, negotiations should not be made hostage to domestic situations and internal policies. "Open threats and red lines on the part of Israel can only poison the atmosphere," Hassouna wrote.
Related stories:
The great divides
Mood watching at the Camp
'Our homeland is not for sale'
What dreams may come
A final summit?
Bars on the window of opportunity
On compromise solutions
Saving face, wasting time
