|
|
April 12, 2002/Nisan 30, 5762, Vol. 54, No. 30
Three paths toward peace
LESLIE SUSSER
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Even before the first Israeli tanks swept into Ramallah at the start of Operation Protective Wall, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was being asked what he intended to do the day after the tanks withdrew.
From day one, it was clear that the operation would not in itself put a stop to Palestinian terror.
Unless, that is, there was some political solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
But how best to achieve it?
There are three basic approaches: incrementalism, unilateralism and international intervention.
All three hold out some hope - and all three are deeply flawed.
Both Sharon and the American administration have been inclined to continue along the slow incremental path from violence to cease-fire to graded political re-engagement, outlined in the "Tenet-Mitchell'' framework, named for CIA Director George Tenet and former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell.
Operation Protective Wall, besides trying to smash the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure, was also ostensibly an attempt to pressure the Palestinians into declaring a cease-fire and starting Tenet-Mitchell.
But will a humiliated and discredited Arafat be in any mood to declare a cease-fire? And if he does, will his badly hit security services be able to maintain it?
The assumption that Arafat will not call off the violence and that there is no partner for dialogue on the Palestinian side has led many Israelis on the left and the right to propose unilateralist solutions.
The basic idea is that Israel withdraw unilaterally to a new line from which it can better defend itself and begin talks with the Palestinians, who would create their own state, on a political solution as soon as they are ready.
The key question for the unilateralists, of course, is where you draw the new line. The lack of international enthusiasm for unilateral solutions and the fact that by definition they do not include an end to the conflict has spawned solutions based on the international community imposing its will on both parties.
Left-wing Meretz leader Yossi Sarid wants to see an American mandate in the Palestinian territories, nursing the Palestinians to statehood and peace with Israel along the lines of the Saudi peace initiative.
The new mandate would have U.N. sanction and would automatically replace the Israeli occupation. American or NATO soldiers would be stationed between Israel and the Palestinian territories to protect both sides.
The advantage of the imposed solution is that it is final and underwritten in the most emphatic way by the international community.
The question is whether outside countries would be prepared to make the commitment, and even if they did, whether they would be able to impose their will on both sides.
Leslie Susser is the diplomatic correspondent for the Jerusalem Report.
|
