Israeli-Palestinian Peace: Will Bush Take the Lead?

Once again, the Bush administration is belatedly reacting to events with a feeble attempt at revitalizing the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The administration's record of making rhetoric and making war rather than engaging in serious diplomacy does not inspire confidence among Israelis and Palestinians who now desperately need United States leadership to reach a negotiated settlement which ends the conflict. Even now, if the administration has the political will and grasps the strategic benefits - despite its lack of attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for 6 years - breakthroughs can still be achieved providing the President is willing to engage the full persuasive powers of the United States in the effort.

Despite the war in Iraq and other crises in the Middle East region, some factors now favor a US initiative to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

What has already been officially negotiated by Israel and the Palestinians needs to be revised by the United States adding American ideas and a reasonable timetable for implementation. The Quartet - the United Nations, European Union, Russia and the United States - will clearly support a "made in America" framework which will have the added advantage of allowing the Israelis and Palestinians to 'save face' by claiming they are making concessions to Washington, and not to each other.

The new Middle East representative of the Quartet, former Prime Minister Tony Blair knows the issues, is deeply committed to the resolution of the conflict and can operate free of US domestic retraints if he has a mandate from the White House. For his support of the Iraq war, President Bush owes Blair a genuine effort to make progress toward Israeli-Palestinian peace. Blair's willingness to work this complex problem should be a welcome bonus to the White House.

Another important new factor is that Saudi Arabia has publicly re-confirmed that the Arab League resolution, first adopted in 2002, commits all Arab states to full normalization with Israel when Israel and the Palestinians sign a treaty. All Arab states will accept whatever mutually acceptable negotiated agreements the Israelis reach with the Palestinians as well as with Syria and Lebanon.

Earlier this year, the United States finally tacitly recognized that this historic breakthrough, initiated by Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, will permanently end the conflict between Israel and the Arabs, but is only now getting around to trying to revitalize the peace process. U.S. inspired summit meetings with Arab leaders, between Israel's Prime Minister and the Palestinian Authority President raise expectations in the region which can lead to new rounds of violence. These summits rarely produce breakthroughs, but they do add to the long history of peace-processing rather than peace-making in the region for which the United States is, at least, partially responsible. The stakes are too high now to engage in peace-processing.

Even Israel's beleagured Prime Minister has responded positively to the Arab initiative. His public invitation to the Saudis and the Arabs for yet another summit is understandable, considering Israel's craving for acceptance. The Saudis may attend the Middle East multilateral meeting the US is pushing for this fall, however. Arab states are not going to accept direct negotiations with Israel. Arabs may meet Israelis secretly, yet many are not prepared to meet publicly which they see as a reward.

Israel, despite its political weakness, is the stronger party. If its leaders decide to make peace with the Palestinians, there are many relatively cost free yet meaningful steps Israel can continue to take to show its intentions and give relief to the Palestinians. Hamas has succeeded in isolating itself in Gaza which divides the Palestinians, yet, even this tragic development creates a new opportunity to move forward. For Israel to take meaningful steps is not a favor to the Saudis nor to the Palestinians. It is in Israel's national interest to make peace. After 40 years of occupation, with some 80% of the Palestinian population born since l967, making peace is not going to get easier with time though it is highly likely that the two-state solution will eventually become impossible to achieve.

The Palestinians are the weakest party. Nevertheless, the new Palestinian government, like all other Arab governments, publicly accepts the Arab initiative and is fully committed to a negotiated settlement. The deterioration in the daily and political lives of the Palestinians along with the dilemma posed by the election of Hamas make it very difficult, if not impossible, for the Palestinians to take initiatives, control their own security or establish secular national parties to replace Fatah which is no longer trusted by Palestinians. Despite constant calls for them "to get their act together," Palestinian options to improve their own situation or appeal to Israel are severely limited, an unpleasant reality which has to be recognized if a peace process is to move forward.

Still, if the Israelis are forthcoming, making use of their strong position and formidable power, the Palestinian Authority President, though weakened, is an authorized partner for peace. Ironically, President Mahmoud Abbas cannot deliver to Israel what Israel demands on a daily basis, but he can negotiate a full peace treaty with Israel which will win overwhelming support from the Palestinian people, including those in Gaza, in any referendum. Abbas and his team, despite their own problems, are well aware of Israel's sensitivities and requirements. They know that difficult accommodations will be necessary on security, borders, refugees and an arrangement for East Jerusalem.

For Israel, this is a strategic target of opportunity. For the first time, the end of the road with the Palestinians is full normalization with all Arab states and a permanent end to conflict.

Israel faces an existential choice: can living behind a wall and militarily controlling the West Bank bring Israel the security and acceptance it deserves and needs? Or, is Israel capable of seizing this strategic opportunity to make peace with the Palestinians - despite Hamas and some violent resistance - to become a partner in the region?

Israeli expectations that they can continue to wait until violent resistance is eliminated in the absence of peace is not realistic and will not now or in the future contribute to Israel's quest for security. Israelis have tried many approaches since 1967, but none have been successful. In fact, each new approach may bring momentary calm, then the situation on the ground always goes from bad to worse escalating the violence. The United States, the Arabs and Israel's own leaders can help Israelis appreciate the benefits of full normalization in the region. Israelis may not be able to imagine being permanently accepted as a partner in the region or to fully comprehend the positive impact full normalization with all Arab states will have politically, culturally, economically and strategically. Yet, the majority of Israelis crave an end to the conflict and support withdrawal from territories and the creation of a Palestinian state living in peace and security with Israel.

Ultimately, Israel has to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, not with the United States, the Saudis or anyone else. The parameters of a peace agreement are well known and accepted by a majority of Israelis and Palestinians. Some contentious final status issues remain which require direct US mediation and American ideas. If Israel has the political will, those final status issues are not beyond the imagination of the Palestinians. It has to be a joint venture which allows both to come out of the process with their minimal requirements. To be successful, neither side will get everything they want or claim they need, but the long term rewards of an end to conflict and full normalization in the region will be worth any sacrifices.

To get to peace, the old games of blame, threats, victimization, fear and self-righteousness along with self-fulfilling prophesies - the discourse of the Arab-Israel conflict for decades - will have to be put aside - as comforting as they may be for the parties. The focus must be kept on the future. Historians can and will determine who did what to whom in the years to come. For now, it is a futile exercise. If the Israelis are ready to make peace with the Palestinians, the promise of coexistence, security and full normalization are worth considering. When the conflict ends, the security of the Jewish state within agreed and recognized borders will be achieved, for good.

The only question is whether the President of the United States, even this late in his administration, is willing to engage in bold diplomacy to help the Israelis and Palestinians reach a settlement or will summitry, occasional visits by US officials to the region which adds to the administration's litany of rhetoric become Bush's legacy. He still has a choice with no time to lose.