5 - 11 April 2001
Issue No.528
|
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 5 - 11 April 2001 Issue No.528 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Reflections
Meanwhile, back at the bazaar
Let's for a moment take the peace process at its word. The Palestinian-Israeli struggle is not predicated on the fundamental fact of one people oppressing and dispossessing another. It is not a question of repression and resistance. Rather, we're haggling in a bazaar. The commodity we are trying to purchase is called land, and we want to pay for it in a currency called peace. Here, we can disregard the fact that we are buying stolen goods; that the seller did not come by his merchandise by legitimate means; and that, as it happens, it was stolen from us. All of these facts are firmly established by the law of the land, namely, in our case, the Geneva conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a host of UN resolutions, including even the Partition of Palestine Resolution of 1948. But as our luck would have it, the Muhtasib or market inspector is crooked. He has an arrangement, of a strategic kind, with the other party to the supposed deal. Never mind also that the worth of our currency is highly dubious. If it was ever worth anything at all, it now looks more and more like the Lebanese lira during the last days of the civil war.
What we are interested in here, however, is the haggling itself, which seems to have collected a large crowd, some of whom, including the crooked Muhtasib, involve themselves in the bargaining in different ways. It is a sight to behold, for the contenders are breaking every rule of bargaining ever known to man or woman; this is one bizarre bazaar.
I am, I must admit at once, very unskilled at the art of bargaining. Usually, I either buckle under too soon, or walk away in disgust, possibly missing out on what someone with more skill would have made a very good bargain of. But even I know that, when the Khan Al-Khalili merchant I'm buying spices from begins with 20 to my offer of 10, the next round should be somewhere around 18 and 12, possibly closing the deal at 15. What that next round cannot be -- by any stretch of the imagination -- however, is one in which I concede the full 20 only to be told that the item in question is now worth 30; I concede the 30, and the price goes up to 50. I am, meanwhile, being held down by the Muhtasib, whipped by the merchant and jeered at, nudged and prodded by most members of the crowd, including a few members of my own family, who are supposedly standing around to help me strike a good bargain.
Prostate on the ground, bruised and bloodied, a man I've often observed strutting and preening around the souq cloaked in an 'abaya identical to that of the Muhtasib, kneels down beside me and whispers in my ear that all this is only fair; after all, I must be punished for having missed out on the previous offer. (If you are not already bored to tears by Mr Thomas Friedman's presidential "memos," see the New York Times, 27 March. I, unfortunately, have to make a living as a journalist, and in this profession alienated wage labour takes such forms as being obliged to read Mr Friedman, watch CNN, etc).
I am not about to review the dismal history of the Middle Eastern bazaar called the peace process. Let us merely observe the bargaining since Sharon came to power in Israel less than two months ago. For a time we had the line that any Palestinian-Israeli negotiations must begin where they left off at Taba. Allegedly, according to Palestinian officials, Taba's non-agreement "reflected" (I never understood exactly how) the achievements of the Intifada. Taba then disappeared. Anyone who has the most cursory familiarity with the Palestinian-Israeli peace process should be fully familiar at this point with this now-you-see-it-now-you-don't aspect to Palestinian and Arab stances towards the process. It was back to Sharm Al-Sheikh, which -- if anyone still remembers -- was essentially aimed at "restoring" the situation to what it was before 28 September, i.e. before the Intifada. But Sharm Al-Sheikh has also disappeared. The next rabbit out of the Arabs' hat, as I understand it, is going to be a lulu. Arafat, it has been whispered (see "Arafat's bitter options," p.7), is being advised by fellow Arabs to call on Palestinians to halt the Intifada for a four- to six-week period, during which six months of negotiations will be launched on interim and final-status issues. It is, in my view, a very unlikely bid. Arafat cannot do it, and even if he does make the call, no one will heed it.
But let us assume for argument's sake that it will happen, and negotiations are launched. The "final" will be the first to go. Sharon will have got everything he demanded: a halt to the Intifada and negotiations around so-called long-term interim agreements. By then, of course, he will have upped the ante some more. Long-term interim agreements will require shorter-term interim agreements, and each agreement will require implementation agreements, more guarantees of Israeli security, more security coordination, and more repression of Palestinians in the occupied territories... Meanwhile, settlements will continue to expand "organically" and otherwise, the land will keep shrinking, even as the bypass roads, military checkpoints and the like eat up more and more olive groves and citrus trees, and destroy more Palestinian lives and livelihoods. Soon enough, Arafat will be demanding "a return" to a long-term interim agreement; and Friedman will be writing yet another memo.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page