|
|
Strategizing began long before peace summit in U.S.
DAVID LANDAU
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
Despite some tension-producing events in recent days, it was hard to imagine that Israeli and Palestinian leaders, having agreed to attend this week's summit in Maryland, would walk out without producing an agreement.
Results of the Oct. 15 summit, in which President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright were scheduled to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, were not available at press time. But it was clear prior to the talks that if either Netanyahu or Arafat remained stubborn over details and refused to reach a long-delayed agreement, the problems they would be creating for President Clinton could well be reciprocated.
To be sure, Clinton is wounded because of his own domestic problems. But he is not so weak that he would not exact a price on whoever thwarts his drive for a much-needed foreign policy success. The outlook in Jerusalem, therefore, is that this time the moment of truth is finally at hand, at least in terms of the further Israeli redeployment from the West Bank.
With the size of the pullback - 13 percent - no longer in dispute, the negotiators were expected to focus on the security aspects of their evolving accord. The feeling before the summit was that the goodwill hopefully fostered in the relative seclusion of the summit site - the Wye Plantation in eastern Maryland - would help restore at least a modicum of confidence between Israelis and Palestinians. Whether any agreements that come out of the summit could be carried out smoothly was less certain, in the eyes of many observers, given the many pitfalls and setbacks that could arise during its three-month implementation period.
If an optimistic scenario regarding the Wye summit did not pan out, observers said, then Netanyahu's purpose - as made very clear during the run-up period to the meeting by his aides - would be to convince American opinion that Arafat was the culprit, that his recalcitrance was the cause of the dashed hopes. The prime minister's stern comments last week, in the wake of a fatal stabbing of a female soldier in the Jordan Valley, was a foretaste of the media blitz he was poised to unleash - against the Palestinians' inability to fight terror - if the talks failed. "This brutal slaying only demonstrates the need for us to stand firm on the issues we are indeed standing firm on," Netanyahu said.
With a special sense for political timing, Netanyahu combined his statement of outrage over the killing with a formal announcement that Ariel Sharon, champion of the hard-line camp, was to be appointed foreign minister and would be accompanying him to the summit. The appointment is seen as a masterstroke designed to sow division and discomfort among the political right, which was breathing fire and brimstone in advance of this week's summit.
Ministers from the National Religious Party, along with hard-line Knesset members from the Land of Israel bloc, were threatening to bring down the government if Netanyahu made unwarranted concessions. But these threats ring hollow against Sharon's apparent resolve that the present government is here to stay - with him as a central pillar of it.
In what appears as another attempt to defuse the right, Netanyahu last week designated the West Bank settlement of Ariel as a city. At an Oct. 9 ceremony in Ariel, Netanyahu sought to soothe the settler community with a vow to continue expanding existing Jewish settlements. "We are building and will continue to build," he said, adding that the city of Ariel would "be part of Israel in any final-status agreement in the future."
In the days before Wye, Netanyahu seemed confident that he had taken the steps needed to shore himself up against any possible threats from the political right. Adding to the prime minister's confidence was the clear signal emanating from the Labor leadership that, if an agreement were to be signed at Wye, Labor would make up for any defections in the coalition ranks when the agreement comes up for Knesset approval. The Labor "safety net" is not open-ended; it will remain in effect only as long as the implementation period lasts.
Looking beyond that, Netanyahu's domestic political strategy is clear. It is based on the unanimous findings of opinion polls over a lengthy period that a solid majority of Israelis want the redeployment agreement to be concluded and the peace process to continue. If the right carries out its threat, once Labor's support is withdrawn, and brings down his government, Netanyahu will run in early elections as a center-of-the-road leader with a proven record of tough negotiation but eventual agreement with the Arab side. And if the right backs down, Netanyahu will be greatly strengthened both by the agreement itself and by his having faced down his domestic political critics.
Seasoned observers warn, though, that this no-lose scenario could be marred by the restless personality of the new foreign minister. Is Sharon's desire solely to attain a measure of "rehabilitation" on the national and international stage, 15 years after he was forced to resign the Defense Ministry in the wake of the massacres at the Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut during the 1982 war in Lebanon? If so, Netanyahu can look forward to a fruitful working relationship with a man of proven ability and ingenuity.
Or does Sharon still harbor the ambition to become prime minister? The number of pejoratives and contemptuous insults he has flung at Netanyahu during the past two years could fill pages. Are they all part of the past now? Or will Netanyahu find himself riding a tiger?
David Landau writes from Jerusalem.
|
