Night and day
Last week's meeting of Palestinian factions in Cairo has paved the way for future progress, writes Ibrahim Nafie
That the dialogue between the Palestinian factions in Cairo ended on Sunday without an agreement led many to judge the talks as a failure. A more astute reading of what transpired, though, makes clear progress has been made, and can be built on.
Against the backdrop of Israel's relentless aggression 12 Palestinian factions with widely differing viewpoints and ideologies were brought together. Add to this that the parties discussed a number of sensitive issues they had not previously explored together, many of which the PA, as the elected government of the Palestinian people, had previously considered its own preserve, and there is ample ground to call the meeting a success. Certainly there can be no doubting the degree of patriotic and political acumen exhibited by the participants, which reflects a qualitative shift in the Palestinians' performance across the board.
The Cairo meetings have contributed to strengthening the hand of the PA. Now Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei is armed with the backing of the factions on such issues as the truce, the separating wall and Palestinian prisoners and detainees. He is also in a much stronger position with regard to the demand for Israeli reciprocity. Above all, what Israel cannot and should not expect is for the Palestinian factions to offer a truce free of charge. A truce not backed by mutual guarantees is a truce destined to collapse.
At the same time the Palestinians' meetings are testimony to the Palestinians' desire to reach a ceasefire and pave the way for negotiations. They came to Cairo because there is a window of opportunity, one that may soon vanish as the US becomes engrossed in the campaigns for next year's presidential elections. They are also aware of how important it is to capitalise on the current climate of international opinion, which now more than ever before views Israel as an aggressive and brutal occupying power and a major threat to world peace. They are also aware that the outrages perpetrated by the Israeli occupation and the damage this has done to Israel's international standing has galvanised the long recumbent Israeli left into renewed life. This reawakening has been manifested recently in mass protest demonstrations, the unprecedented outpouring of grief elicited by the commemoration of Rabin and the agreements reached by members of the Israeli left with like-minded Palestinian peace advocates.
What the meeting of 12 Palestinian factions tells public opinion abroad and in Israel is that the Palestinians are prepared to work with an Israeli peace partner in order to reach a just and comprehensive settlement and usher in a new era of peaceful coexistence and cooperation. Unfortunately the Israeli government is not similarly prepared. Evidence of Israel's attitudes can be seen in its response to the UN General Assembly resolution seeking to bring the question of the separating wall before the international court of justice. Israel greeted the resolution with its customary brew of contempt, hurling accusations at all concerned, reserving special vehemence for the Arabs and the UN secretary-general who had unequivocally condemned the wall as injurious to four million Palestinians. Typical of the way Israeli officials have and continue to distort the truth, Israel's ambassador to the UN remarked that "it is Yasser Arafat who built the separating wall." Another Israeli official, in an interview with Yediot Aharanot, scoffed that the UN General Assembly issues resolutions declaring that night is day because the balance of power in the assembly enables the Palestinians to pass virtually anything. Ranan Gisin, advisor to the Israeli Prime Minister, waded in to say that the Arab-sponsored resolution represented a bid to freeze the roadmap. Talk about calling the night day!
Many Israeli writers hold the right-wing government of Sharon at fault for the mounting cycle of violence. Beneath the headline, "Who's the traitor?" in Yediot Aharanot, Yahuda Litani asks, "Who are the conspirators? Those who work in secret to perpetuate an occupation over millions of Arabs or the peace activists who declare their objectives outright? Who are the traitors? Those who are doing their best to hasten the forthcoming military confrontation against the Arabs or those who are working to alleviate tensions and reach agreements?"
Some Israeli commentators have gone so far as to hold Sharon and his government entirely responsible for the resurgence of violence and terrorism. Beneath the headline in Yediot Aharanot, "They know that now's the time," we read: "Terrorism is a form of despair brought on by the occupation. If there is one lesson to be learned from the closing decades of the 20th century it is that the fate of all foreign occupations is to die."
According to the testimony of fellow Israelis, the Sharon government lacks the mindset to enter into an equitable negotiating process with the PA. To make matters worse it is encouraged in its attitudes by an American administration that similarly lacks the necessary resolve. True, the current US administration has occasionally voiced its disapproval of the belligerent policies of the Israeli prime minister. However, it is also true that this administration has done next to nothing to curb Sharon's excesses. It has exerted no effective pressure on his government to halt construction of the separating wall. To have deducted the costs of that wall from loan credits to Israel means little, since the costs amount to no more than three per cent of the total of the credits. Indeed, it is barely a slap on the hand when one considers that the US, under Bush senior, froze $10 billion in loan guarantees to reprimand Shamir for his intransigence towards the Madrid conference, aggravating the economic difficulties that were instrumental in bringing down the Shamir government. How starkly Bush junior contrasts with the strength and integrity of his father. Given the moral, military and political support the current Bush administration is giving Sharon, one can only hold it complicit in Israel's crimes against the Palestinian people and its violations of international law.
Nevertheless, in spite of Sharon's attitudes, we still hold out hope for the anticipated meeting between him and Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei. During the meeting we hope that Sharon bears in mind that only through a sincere commitment to the roadmap will it be possible to end the cycle of violence.
The Arabs, too, have an major role to play in this process. Beyond extending all possible political and moral support to the Palestinian people we must do our utmost to make it possible for the Palestinian factions to support the PA every step along the way to restoring calm and resuming of negotiations.
