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

What dreams may come

By Sherine Bahaa

The decision of the PLO's Central Committee earlier this month to declare a sovereign Palestinian state before the end of this year, either as part of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement or unilaterally, has set Palestinian statehood high on the agenda in the Camp David negotiations.

"One major motive behind the Camp David summit at this particular time is to act as a pre-emptive measure to avoid a crisis that might emerge on 13 September," Ghassan El-Khatib, Head of Jerusalem Media and Communication Centre (JMCC), told Al-Ahram Weekly.

Palestinians argue that since the deadline for concluding final settlement talks is 13 September, according to the Sharm Al-Sheikh deal signed 10 months ago by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, they should be free to declare the state at this date. Originally, Arafat threatened to unilaterally declare a state in May 1999, after the end of the five-year interim period stipulated by the 1993 Oslo accord. Yet, international and Arab pressure convinced Arafat to postpone this declaration to avoid any moves that might increase the popularity of former right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu ahead of scheduled parliament elections at that time.

Both Netanyahu and Barak threatened that if a Palestinian state were declared unilaterally, Israel will not hesitate to recapture the territories it has already ceded to the Palestinians. Both have insisted that this step must be agreed on bilaterally.

"The Americans and the Israelis want to get out of this crisis without giving concessions because they simply do not want peace. Their only solution will be another framework agreement, ie, an ad hoc truce," said Abdel-Jawad Saleh, former minister at the Palestinian Authority and a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), to the Weekly. "The essence of this framework will be the old Abu Mazen-Beilin document, which Barak was discussing with his government days before heading to Camp David."

In 1995, Yossi Beilin, now Israeli minister of justice, and Palestinian chief negotiator, Mahmoud Abbas, known as Abu Mazen, worked out what has been known as the "Abu Mazen-Beilin document" which suggested for the first time an exchange of territories in order to allow for the establishment of a Palestinian state, which enjoys geographic integrity. The idea was that Palestinians would give up parts of the West Bank, now densely occupied by Jewish settlers, in return for getting other parts of territories from Israel to from their own state. Both Abu Mazen and Beilin denied that such a document existed, but they did concede that some ideas were discussed concerning all thorny issues in final settlement talks.

Haim Ramon, an Israeli minister without portfolio known for his close relation to Barak, said that although the Beilin-Abu Mazen document suggested this concept of "land for land exchange," the process would not be of equal proportions. "What was suggested was three to one, and the one is of course for the Palestinians," Ramon was quoted as saying.

"This suggestion marks a deviation from international legality that will leave the Palestinian position much weaker as it will not be guarded or based on anything," said El-Khatib.

But whatever the outcome of the summit, El-Khatib supports the idea of declaring a state "because Palestinians cannot allow the situation to exceed this year's time frame without anything being done. This will be equal to a de facto acceptance of the continuity of the interim agreement without any specific date, which is very harmful to the Palestinians," added El-Khatib.

In the meantime, Arafat is caught between a rock and a hard place. Either he declares a state in September, risking a serious stalemate in the peace process and possible escalation of violence, or accept another postponement at the expense of his credibility as a leader among the Palestinians.

Saleh, on the other hand, believes that the unilateral declaration of a state will mean a golden prize for Israel and a major catastrophe for the Palestinians. "It will be Israel, rather than any other country that will first recognise the Palestinian state. It is going to be a state void of any content," warned Saleh.

"I am sceptical of this whole issue of a state. If we declare a state with no agreement being reached, then we will be declaring it on areas where we have people but no lands, no water, no international borders, no passages or airports, no return to our refugees. It will be a pretext for the Israelis to stop the talks," explained Saleh during a telephone interview from Ramallah.

Saleh also pointed out that even on the internal level there is not enough support for a unilaterally declared state. "Palestinians feel frustrated because of the practices of the Palestinian Authority that has failed to achieve any of its promises. This, for its part, undermines the capability of the Palestinian community in supporting a declaration of a state and hence chaos might prevail," said Salah.

In a JMCC survey this month, 60 per cent of the Palestinians did not foresee any possibility of a final peace agreement with Israel before the 13 September deadline, and 52 per cent undermined the likelihood of declaring a state. While one third of the total number chose resistance and military conflicts rather than negotiation after their trust in the PA had almost faded.

Saleh approved the outcome of the survey, in view of Arafat's use of the declaration "as a tactic since May 1999 but people here are sure that Arafat will not be able to act against the will of Clinton or Israel."

"It will be up to the negotiations and balance of power or the imbalance of power, which is not in favour of the Palestinians," Khatib concluded.

	weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg