In Mideast Talks to look forward to? David Makovsky writes:
Security cooperation between the PA and Israel has substantially improved. In 2002, 410 Israelis were killed by suicide bombings and other attacks emanating from the West Bank; in the past three years, Israel has suffered one fatality from one such attack. Speaking in Washington this year, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said the situation on the ground “is better than any time in the past.” Israeli charges that the Palestinians have a “revolving door” approach of releasing terrorists after quick arrests — rampant during the Arafat era — are no longer heard. A Palestinian nonviolent protest movement has been born.
What’s missing from this? Well between 2002 and now, Israel fought Operation Defensive Shield, which seriously damaged the terror organizations in the areas under Palestinian Authority’s control. Israel also has been building its much maligned security fence. If it hadn’t been for Israeli actions, there would be Palestinian security apparatus to cooperate with. But not mentioning the actions Israel has taken, Makovsky implicitly affirms that there is not military solution to terrorism. But Israel’s defensive measures have been successful.
Makovsky writes further:
Religious and education reforms have started, including a major effort to identify those imams who agitate for suicide bombings. PA Religion Minister Mahmoud Habbash told me, and Israeli security officials confirm, that such imams have been removed from all Palestinian mosques under PA jurisdiction. “Hamas has been running our mosques for 30 years, and we are trying to take the mosques back so they are used only for prayer,” Habbash told me.
The PA has begun reshaping the curriculum of Palestinian institutions that accredit imams, and screening is also being conducted to weed out schoolteachers who support Hamas radicalism. PA security officials say 1,100 of the 28,000 Palestinian teachers in the West Bank have been replaced. Incitement would be further reduced if, among other things, the practice of naming town squares and camps after the killers of yesteryear ended.
I don’t know how accurate the claim that inciting imams have been removed from PA mosques. PMW reported last month that a PA imam said:
“The Al-Aqsa Mosque is threatened by the plans of the enemies of Allah [the Jews], who have violated all faith and religious laws, and even deviated from their humanity.”
Perhaps my threshhold for incitement is lower than that of the Palestinian Religion Minister.
More troublesome though, is that over the past 17 years we’ve been told that Israel didn’t do this or didn’t do that for peace. Yet by Makovsky’s account, the fundamental job of preparing its people for peace has been absent from from the PA. I’m less than convinced how effectively or completely the PA is fighting incitement, but if they’re doing it now, it’s because they made no effort before now.
There are two issues that are not about quiet policy shifts but will require conditioning of the populations: Jerusalem and refugees — the narrative issues of the conflict that cut to the self-definition of the parties. The difficulties surrounding these issues have led some to question Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s call to complete the talks in one year. But the hope is that progress on security and borders will facilitate political traction on these thornier topics.
If, however, that does not happen, the parties need to find ways to grapple with these final issues in a manner that does not cause other progress to unravel.
I think here that Makovsky’s acknowledging that no final agreement is possible at this time. Certainly not in a year’s time.
Barry Rubin explains why not:
–Hamas announces that since it totally rejects direct talks (much less any peace with Israel) as treason, it is stopping its own negotiations with the PA for cooperation or merger. This shows clearly that the PA cannot reach any deal with Israel (even if it wanted to do so) and deliver on its commitments because of the Hamas factor. Do also remember that not only does Hamas run the Gaza Strip but also has a very large base of support in the PA-ruled West Bank.
–Far from welcoming talks and expressing his eagerness to make peace and live alongside Israel, PA leader Mahmoud Abbas explains that he only requested permission from his true masters (the Fatah leadership) to go to talks for one month. It should be clearly understood that the Fatah leaders include three groups: old companions of Yasir Arafat, ideological hardliners, and perhaps about ten percent relative moderates. It doesn’t want to make a permanent compromise peace with Israel.
–Some Fatah leaders are claiming that even this one-month permission isn’t valid since there wasn’t a quorum at the relevant meeting. In some cases, leaders stayed away on purpose so they could block direct negotiations.
–Other PA and Fatah leaders are unhappy that the U.S. officials claimed there were no preconditions for direct talks since the Palestinians wanted to be given everything (especially the 1967 borders and a state whether or not negotiations succeeded) in advance. Basically, they only want to accept a state from Western hands without any real compromises with Israel (recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, permanent end of conflict, settlement of all Palestinian refugees in Palestine, border changes, non-militarization, and security guarantees).
Prof Rubin adds that there may be a benefit to having talks and for the West to be promoting them, but the conditions are not right now for there to be any hopes of a quick and final agreement between israel and the Palestinians.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
