The possible and impossible
One peace deal reached, one close at hand and a near miss were all in the Arab press this week, writes Dina Ezzat
Click to view caption |
The Syrian daily Teshreen, suggests that the United Nations, with miles-long unimplemented resolutions on Arab issues, has become the Arabs' Wailing Wall.
|
This week the Arab press was rich with stories and commentaries about the peace deals that were being proposed and negotiated to settle some of the many regional disputes.
Of all the debated deals, the Arab press, predictably gave most attention to the Cairo-hosted talks of 12 Palestinian factions. For close to a week, the headlines of the Arab press, be it on the front pages of the eastern part of the Arab world or on the inside pages at the western end, carried developments of the talks that aimed to contain an inter-Palestinian dispute over how to deal with Israel. One morning, the papers reported that a deal over a total truce was in the making. The following day, the deal was reported to have encountered difficulties. Finally, on Monday morning, the Arab press declared the "failure" of the Palestinian factions to reach a deal to "adopt a truce" or to even "exclude all Israeli civilians" from possible acts of resistance. "The Palestinian dialogue hits a dead-end" was a very common headline for the papers Monday morning.
The Arab press also reported excerpts of a communiqué issued at the end of the talks whereby the factions reiterated a commitment to work together to serve the best interests of the Palestinian people. They also covered the Israeli reaction to the negotiations.
Meanwhile, the Arab dailies discussed the current debate among members of the participating factions and the Palestinian Authority over the failure of these talks and the implications. On Monday, the London-based daily Al- Quds Al-Arabi quoted Jebril Al-Rajoub, special security adviser to Palestinian President Yasser Arafat as saying that the PA will not allow the factions to impose their agenda. On the same day, Asharq Al-Awsat, another London-based daily, quoted a prominent Hamas figure, Mohamed Nizal, as criticising the statements made by Rajoub. "We need no lessons from Rajoub. We know very well what we have to do."
Reports were not confined to the participating factions who openly disagreed about the rationale and endgame of a truce with the current Israeli government that only a few months ago broke the rules of a previous cease-fire. Engaging in the debate were several commentators who disagreed about the outcome of the Cairo talks and its implications. On Monday, Abdel-Bari Atwan, the Palestinian editor of Al-Quds Al-Arabi, welcomed the failure of the talks. "With this failure is success", was the title of Atwan's fiery article in which he harshly criticised the talks, the agenda and the host.
"We thank God that the Palestinian talks in Cairo failed to reach a cease-fire deal because such a deal would have only served the interests of the Israeli Prime Minister [Ariel] Sharon." A cease-fire, Atwan argued, "would have saved Sharon from his current crisis and increased the agony of the Palestinian people" because Sharon would have less pressure exercised over him by an Israeli public that has come to see the cost of the violent policies of their prime minister, who would then have more room to coerce "the three million Palestinians" who have been suffering for decades.
In Monday's article, Atwan suggested that the very rationale of this dialogue is "erroneous" because it suggests that the current problem was due to an inter-Palestinian dispute "when in fact it was caused by Israeli terror".
Atwan was not the only one who rejoiced over the talks' failure. Commentators did too, but in a more indirect way. In the daily Al-Bayan of the United Arab Emirates, chairman of the Egyptian Press Syndicate, left-wing writer Galal Aref, argued that what the Palestinians need now is not an inter-Palestinian dialogue or initiatives but a serious shift in the American views over the way a settlement could be made for the Arab-Israeli conflict. The other article was by Ahmed Arafat Al-Qadi who stated that nothing could work now to prompt a serious peace effort because the current Israeli government is not in the least interested in making peace with the Palestinians.
However, it was not unusual for Ahmed Al-Robei, a US sympathiser Kuwaiti columnist in Asharq Al-Awsat to argue exactly the opposite. "It seems that the only thing that the Palestinian factions have become engrossed with is issuing slogans rather than seeing what is in the best interests of the Palestinian cause." According to Al-Robei every time one faction makes a statement, the others hasten to issue a tougher statement. And, said Al-Robei, "It is the Palestinian people who pay the price" as the Israeli occupation army continues to kill more Palestinians and to seize more territory.
But most commentators tended to avoid taking such clear-cut positions with or against the dialogue, its agenda and outcome. For the most part, the Arab press attempted to take a middle of the road stance to avoid offending the factions, the PA and Cairo. A typical position was that expressed by the editorial of the Qatari daily Al-Rayah which argued that "what was needed most now is Palestinian consensus over what needs to be done to allow for the resumption of a diplomatic process."
On another relevant issue, the Arab press continued to debate the implications of the so-called Geneva Agreement.
In Al-Quds Al-Arabi, Jordanian commentator Youssef Al-Hourrani hit the mark when he argued that what matters most is the will of the Palestinian people that seems to be predominantly against the Geneva Accords. "The Geneva Agreement cannot serve as a tool to pressure the Israeli government as some would like to argue because nothing has pressured this government, not even resolutions on international legitimacy." Al-Hourani added that the only party that will be pressured by the accords is the Palestinian people who will be forced by virtue of this deal to make further concessions. According to Al- Hourrani, "The Palestinian people, having gone through a painful struggle and having sacrificed so much to regain their national rights, self-determination and independence, will not give in to such attempts that aim to destroy them."
One deal that did not get much coverage this week was a quasi Middle East peace proposal made by the Jordanian king upon his visit to the US. According to the Sunday edition of Al-Quds Al-Arabi, King Abdullah suggested to US President Bush to pressure the Israeli government into suspending the construction of the separation wall while he will work on getting the Palestinians to declare a truce. This proposal, according to a report on Channel 2 of Israeli TV that was quoted by Al-Quds Al-Arabi, was flatly rejected by Bush who insisted that Palestinians should first "suspend their terror before anything else is negotiated".
Away from the Arab-Israeli file, some other peace deals were proposed. One deal, according to Asharq Al-Awsat of Monday, was made by Abdullah who offered Washington and Tehran his good offices to facilitate the resumption of a dialogue. Abdullah, the paper reported, suggested to Tehran, during a recent visit, to turn in wanted Al-Qa'eda operatives held by Iran, including a son of Osama Bin Laden, in return for American willingness at least to hold a dialogue with Iran. This offer, Asharq Al- Awsat reported, was not immediately turned down by the White House.
The proposed peace deals for Sudan seemed to be the real solid offers put on the table this week. Throughout the week, Arab papers reported the efforts exerted by the Khartoum government to finalise a peace deal with its major power contender, the Sudan Popular Liberation Army and other factions in a bid to end a civil war that has ravaged the country for two decades.
News of peace coming round the corner were heralded this week by Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir whose quote, "War is coming to an end" made the headlines of all the Sudanese dailies and captured the attention of every Arab paper.
News of peace in Sudan was warmly welcomed by Sudanese papers. "The major change is coming round the corner... we are taking the fast lane towards peace and reconciliation that will give the Sudanese people a much better life," wrote the daily Akhbar Al-Youm in its editorial on Sunday.
Moves to make peace in Sudan were welcomed in many Arab dailies. As suggested by the UAE's Al-Ittihad, the peace deals currently being brokered in Sudan will create a new situation by which the Sudanese will be able to share and enjoy the wealth of their country.
Even commentators who warned of the potential risks of the upcoming deal between Khartoum and the SPLA conceded that peace was better than war. In his article "Sudan... a step forward", Ali Ibrahim wrote in Asharq Al- Awsat, "there is real concern that this peace deal would lead to the catastrophe of separation. But even this fear is no reason for the war to go on."
And on Tuesday, Asharq Al-Awsat offered its reader a most unusual piece of news: "Bush calls Sudanese President Bashir" to discuss the Sudan peace deal.
