|
|
July 14, 2000/11 Tammuz 5760, Vol. 52, No.44
Fear of success impacts Camp David talks
NEIL RUBIN
Baltimore Jewish Times
As this is written, the eyes of the world are turning toward the Maryland mountains for an important but not end-all critical moment in the Mideast peace quest. As you read this, the blanks are being filled in.
The days preceding the latest U.S. presidential summons for a summit were wrought with fear that Israel's leader, with a shattered coalition, no longer had a mandate for peace; that Yasser Arafat's anti-Oslo hardliners would assure that necessary concessions would be impossible; that these two factors would undoubtedly lead to unknown violence.
But the greatest fear that Jews have, I believe, is the one least discussed, and which needs immediate processing. That is this: Segments of Jerusalem, the heart of the Jewish soul for three millennia, are likely about to be shared.
For many, such statements bring harsh rejection. But it will still happen if a deal is made. And it will occur because a healthy majority of Israelis want it to be so.
It strikes deep into our collective Jewish psyche, literally touching the epicenter of Jewish history.
Somewhere on the Temple Mount sits the Holy of Holies, the home of God's presence during ancient times. And now Israel might relinquish unilateral control of this spot.
Is it too high a price? Is it a prelude to ultimate conquest of the State of Israel?
The classic Jewish response must be, "It depends." It depends on the deal. Nobody, regardless of what the pundits say, know its particulars.
How could they? Even the principals do not yet know its details.
Summits create their own dynamics such as former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu relinquishing 80 percent of Hebron, the real City of David, or Arafat pledging to crack down on terrorists - on which he has an overall spotty record, but a generally solid one this past year.
As we follow the proceedings, we must recognize that Jerusalem is the key to any agreement. Reportedly, President Clinton will seek a delay in acting on it. That would be a catastrophic mistake; it must be dealt with candidly and creatively now.
Other matters will work themselves out. Water sharing can occur; borders can be negotiated; Palestinian refugees' compensation should include compensation to Jewish families forced to flee Hebron and elsewhere in the 1930s, and maybe Arab lands in the 1940s and 1950s; major Jewish settlement blocs will stay under Israeli security control.
But Jerusalem? That city is filled with posters that declare, "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem." The amorphous concept is now crystallizing. The deal that works, I believe, includes this:
- Israel must unqualifiedly control the Old City's Jewish and Armenian Quarters. The rest, the Moslem and Christian sides, needs joint patrols. Yes, it scares me, but no more than walking through the non-Jewish sections of the Old City already does.
- No flag should fly on the Temple Mount. The Palestinians, through the Wakf, or Moslem religious authority, basically control the area. Israel monitors access to it. That should continue and can be done jointly.
- East Jerusalem's Arab neighborhoods not all of east Jerusalem are ostensibly already are under Palestinian control. That should be formalized. Queasy about sharing Jerusalem? No problem. Legally redraw the borders.
We American Jews, conditioned to respond to Jerusalem as the "eternal, unified" capital, must recognize that most Israelis see the reality pragmatically. Jerusalem is no mere religious or political slogan to them.
Of course, all of this needs near-impossible monitoring and subsequent guarantees to address predictable violations. That, indeed, is the real subject of the negotiations. And Israelis will reject such a pact if the Palestinians do not reciprocate in real compromise; to date they offer non-workable, absolutist demands.
Meanwhile, Ehud Barak does what he pledged Israel's electorate he would do: pursue the possibility of peace. He has compromised his Jewish heart, and asked Jews in Israel and the United States to do likewise. In America, our ability to do this will be pivotal in gaining vital aid to pay for all this.
So it's Arafat's turn to be a leader who relies more on true bravery than predictable rhetoric. If he fails, his people might consider him a hero. Will that comfort him as more of their sons and daughters are buried, and the same issues await the next round of talks?
Neil Rubin is senior editor of the Baltimore Jewish Times.
|
