 |
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 26 Oct. - 1 Nov. 2000 Issue No. 505 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 26 Oct. - 1 Nov. 2000 Issue No. 505
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
||
Egypt Palestine International Economy Opinion Culture Focus Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Who wants peace?
By Salama Ahmed Salama
On the eve of the emergency Arab summit in Cairo, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak sent the Arabs a clear message announcing the suspension of peace negotiations with the Palestinians. His objection was that matters in the West Bank and Gaza had not calmed down as the Sharm Al-Sheikh summit decreed. The Intifada, he explained, provides enough justification to stop negotiations on a temporary basis. And he re-emphasised that decision in response to the decisions reached in the Arab summit.
In the context of current developments -- which are informed by the same decisions -- any talk of resuming the peace negotiations seems removed from reality, particularly after Israel has revealed its true face. The Arab summit returned the concept of peace to a framework in which Israel must abide by specific conditions, placing restrictions on Arab parties that had not paid attention to the effects of relations with Israel on the progress of peace throughout recent history, and engaged in trade and semi-diplomatic relations with Israel, dictated by nothing more than the willingness to give in to American pressures and Israeli encouragement.
With the exception of Morocco and Mauritania, Arab countries like Tunisia, Oman, Bahrain and Qatar quickly shut down offices they had established in Israel. The Arab peoples live in anticipation of how the rest of the Arab countries will behave in light of the summit's resolutions. None of these countries would be justified in ignoring the decision to refrain from forging any links with Israel and eliminate links that were forged during the peace negotiations period.
The excuse put forward by such countries was and remains that both Egypt and Jordan have kept full diplomatic relations with the Zionist state. Even at the most critical times, it is said, the two countries did not sever ties; why, ask eager pro-Israeli relations parties, should they be exempted from the imperative to implement summit decisions?
This point gave rise to a great deal of debate within the conference. Even prior to the summit, many states demanded that all Arab countries without exception should end diplomatic relations with Israel. This was not only an official demand, but the demand made by demonstrators in capitals throughout the Arab world.
Nonetheless, one must note a significant difference. In the cases of Egypt and Jordan, diplomatic relations with Israel were established on the basis of international agreements whereby Israel withdrew from lands it had occupied within the two countries' borders. Diplomatic relations were established as conditions of that withdrawal. On the other hand, the countries that rushed, more recently, into relations with Israel -- Qatar, Morocco and Mauritania, for example -- had not been occupied by Israel. And it is possible to argue that the nature of the role played by Egypt and Jordan in support of Palestinian and Arab rights over the last seven years required the use of diplomatic channels to serve Arab issues. That phase, after all, was one in which the choice of peace provided the basis of unified Arab endeavour. That choice was re-emphasised by the summit.
But if Barak has closed the window on peace -- and if the Arabs' unanimous verdict is that normalisation should depend on the extent to which Israeli policies respond to the legal and legitimate demand for Arab rights, calling for a stop to economic relations and multilateral talks as well as mobilisation against Israeli attempts to expand within the Arab world -- then Egypt and Jordan should now reassess the scope and intensity of their various relations with Israel, reducing them to a minimum and freezing them if necessary, while keeping diplomatic channels open only if necessary. For there is no doubt that the "peace process" has entered a long, dark tunnel. Israel has prepared itself for this, and the Arab parties should do so too, led by the Palestinian Authority along with Egypt and Jordan. After all, if Barak can choose not to want peace, why should we?
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
