Black cat

By Salama A Salama

---

Had I been asked to decide the fate of the autumn conference, which has seen Condoleezza Rice return to the region for extensive talks, I would have called for a boycott. I would have urged all the Arabs to stay away, and for the simplest of reasons -- the conference is going to fail. At best it will produce another worthless piece of paper, along the line of the roadmap, giving Israel everything it wants, saving face for the Bush administration and forcing the Palestinians to make further concessions. It is all an act of deception, and one that can only produce further problems, perhaps even a Palestinian civil war.

Interestingly, this view is shared by Iran's spiritual leader, Ali Khamenei, as well as by the former US diplomat Daniel Kurtzer. Khamenei said the conference was doomed and called on Arab countries to boycott it. Kurtzer, who was ambassador to Egypt and Israel and is now professor of Middle East studies at Princeton, wrote an article in the International Herald Tribune arguing that President Bush has undermined the conference even before it convenes. By asking the participants to recognise Israel's right to exist, endorse the two-state solution, renounce violence and recognise existing agreements, Bush made sure the conference was heading nowhere.

Washington wants the conference confined to bilateral talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But not all the Palestinians are invited. Mahmoud Abbas will go, but Hamas is to remain stuck in Gaza. Washington, in addition, continues to ignore the Arab -- or Saudi -- initiative which calls for Israel to withdraw from all occupied territories, including the Golan. Now, if Israel is unwilling to let go of all the land it occupied why would Syria go to the talks? And how can we expect full normalisation of ties between the Arabs and the Israelis to take place?

The Israelis keep talking about the vast number of red lines they cannot cross in negotiations. But Olmert is going to the conference with a letter in his pocket, a letter that Bush sent to Sharon and which endorses Israel's annexing of occupied Palestinian land as well as its rejection of the right of Palestinian refugees to return. Olmert will undoubtedly try to integrate these points into any agreement that emerges from the autumn conference.

The Arabs, meanwhile, have no red, or even yellow, lies. So far six meetings have been held between Olmert and Abbas, all beginning with embraces and then ending with yet more embraces. But what exactly has been accomplished between the handclasps? We don't know. No written records of the meetings have been made public. Meanwhile, Olmert keeps insisting on leaving all the most difficult issues out of the talks. He does not want to bother with questions such as borders, refugees, Jerusalem and the settlements. He does not, in short, want to address the issues that are at the crux of the problem. Yet unless they are discussed we have every right to ask precisely what the conference is about.

How long will President Abbas continue to chase a mirage? Is he willing to make concessions such as exchanging desert land in Negev for Israeli settlements in the West Bank? And if so, why is he rejecting dialogue with Hamas? Why is he opposed to any Arab mediation in this regard? And why is he not asking the Israelis to refrain from encircling Jerusalem with more settlements or carving off more Palestinian territory? What is Abbas going to do when Olmert brings up Clause One of the roadmap, which calls for him to liquidate terror cellars, a euphemism for Hamas?

The Arabs at the conference will be like someone trying to look for a black cat in a dark room. They have no room for manoeuvre, no winning cards. So why bother going in the first place?