Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Nudging towards Peace

by Ian S. Lustick and Gershon Shafir


In the early 1990s, the United States carefully nudged Israel toward appreciating the long-term costs of continued occupation and settlement of the West Bank. It did so before the Israeli elections. New elections will take place in about a week Israel. What would be an equally effective American approach to prod forward the moribund peace process?

At the beginning of 1992, Yitzhak Shamir, the Israeli Prime Minister from the Likud, made it plain that he would divert the growing wave of Soviet Jewish immigration to the West Bank. He intended to finance the project with a $10 billion American loan guarantee. But President George H. W. Bush threatened to veto any loan guarantees that did not include a freeze on all new settlements. The hard-line Shamir demurred and expressed his willingness to forgo the guarantees, but the American move had its effect nonetheless. One result of American policy was the shift of a few tens of thousands of votes in the 1992 Israeli elections in favor of "changing Israel’s priorities," thereby contributing decisively to the victory of Yitzhak Rabin. Under his premiership, Israel engaged in secret talks with the PLO, and on September 13, 1993 signed the Oslo accord with the PLO in President Clinton’s eighth month in office.

The Oslo process ultimately failed, for multiple reasons of omission and commission on all sides. But that is not surprising. It was the first time core issues of the conflict were put on the table. The real lesson of Oslo, and of the tantalizingly successful negotiations at Taba that followed on the failure at Camp David, is that another try is not only the only possible path to peace, but actually might have a chance to succeed. It is therefore worth considering closely just how little the U.S. had to do to trigger robust Israeli moves toward peace and yet how crucial its actions were.

Of great significance is that the Bush administration did not directly pressure Israel. Oslo was not a process imposed on Israelis. Of equal significance is the proof offered by this episode of —just how closely Israelis attend to U.S. words and deeds. The dramatic reversal of Israeli government policy on the key issue of settlements and negotiations with the PLO also show that Israel’s commitment to settlements and continued rule of the West Bank is relatively weak. Deep down Israelis know their governments have been over-reaching in efforts to absorb the Palestinian territories. But it is only when the smothering blanket of assured U.S. support on every issue is removed, that Israeli democracy has a chance to display its fundamental wisdom.

To be sure, after the signing of the Oslo accord, U.S. vigilance faltered and Rabin allowed the resumption of settlements in the West Bank, a fatal thorn in the side of the Oslo accord. As the recent war in Gaza demonstrated, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is entering a new and dangerous phase, in which neither side imagines violence as an unpleasant but necessary route to peace, but only as a desperate and furious reaction to the perceived evil of the other. If this pattern is to end, and only an end to this pattern can save both the Jewish state and the Palestinians, the Obama administration will have to act with at least the tact, subtlety and effectiveness of the Bush-Baker team.

One advantage the Obama-Clinton-Mitchell team have, that Bush and Baker did not, is the Arab League Peace Plan. In return for full Israeli withdrawal and a "just solution" to the Palestinian refugee problem it offers to "establish normal relations with Israel in the context of [a] comprehensive peace" and "consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended." In the past year Arab leaders have urged a revival of the plan and Israeli cabinet members have spoken of it approvingly. Both Hamas and Fatah have considered adopting a version of it. The terms of the accord will need to be negotiated, but the involvement of the moderate Arab states in resolving the conflict would add the regional dimension that has been missing since the Madrid talks in the early 1990's. If an accord is reached on this basis, it would be difficult for Hamas to resume rocketing Israel and it would find itself, within the context of a Palestinian plebiscite, under great pressure to find a way to sign up to the agreement and adopt the profile of a "loyal Islamic opposition" in a real and thriving Palestinian state.

To enable this vision to be achieved, unprecedented steps on settlements, prisoners, uses of violence, and rhetorical indulgences, will be needed, not to build confidence, but to drain cynicism. Past experience shows that Israeli settlements can either expand or shrink; they never remain frozen. Consequently, one important measure would have to be the removal of all "illegal" settlements, a promise repeatedly given and invariably violated by Israeli governments. A key Israeli step will be the freeing of Marwan Barghuti. Barghuti, a leader of Fatah's young guard, justifies resistance to occupation but condemns attacks on Israeli civilians, thus clearly distinguishing himself from Hamas. He is the fresh and popular face Fatah is lacking. His release would also demonstrate an Israeli future willingness to reconsider the fate of Palestinian prisoners, a particularly painful dimension of the conflict. Once the reality of this opportunity is established, Palestinian public pressure on Hamas and other extremists to end rocket attacks on Israel will become as strong as they can ever be. Then, finally, and perhaps for the last possible time, a serious and comprehensive effort to scale the mountain of peace can be well and truly launched.

To open this opportunity, President Obama needs to nudge the Israeli electorate. He should make U.S. support in the Security Council contingent on Israeli government negotiations based on the Arab League Plan for a real two state solution. Alternatively, the next Israeli government will face an international community, joined by the United States, determined to break the siege of Gaza and build a framework of negotiations, including Hamas if it agrees to the terms of the same Arab League Plan.



Ian S. Lustick is the Bess W. Heyman Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and Gershon Shafir is Professor of Sociology at the University of California, San Diego.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is just craziness, is there no sense of how ferocious the Israeli government has been and will continue to be is smashing Palestinians? Actually the coming election will only mean a more ferocious Israeli government, and more misery for the Palestinians beyond any who choose to be puppets for Israeli.

This essay is written as though the decimation of Gaza never happened.

Yuck.

Anonymous said...

When has Israel even in any way stopped the expansion of settlements and property grabs from Palestinians from Jerusalem through the West Bank? When? The expansion is ceaseless and brutal, but this essay knows nothing of this.

Anonymous said...

Here is what Israel is about, stealing from Palestinians:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/2/4/headlines#9

February 4, 2009

Israel to Build New West Bank Settlement
By Amy Goodman

Meanwhile, the Israeli government has announced another new West Bank settlement expansion that will violate the US-backed road map. Israel says it will establish a new settlement to replace a settlers’ outpost it hadn’t approved. Up to 1,400 housing units will be built under the plan. Last month, the Israeli group Peace Now reported settlement expansion increased nearly 60 percent in 2008.

Anonymous said...

"The dramatic reversal of Israeli government policy on the key issue of settlements and negotiations with the PLO also show that Israel’s commitment to settlements and continued rule of the West Bank is relatively weak. Deep down Israelis know their governments have been over-reaching in efforts to absorb the Palestinian territories. But it is only when the smothering blanket of assured U.S. support on every issue is removed, that Israeli democracy has a chance to display its fundamental wisdom."

This is completely offensive, in the midst of a naive or otheerwise offensive essay.

Anonymous said...

"As the recent war in Gaza demonstrated, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is entering a new and dangerous phase, in which neither side imagines violence as an unpleasant but necessary route to peace, but only as a desperate and furious reaction to the perceived evil of the other."

More offensive still, a justification of the crazed destruction of Palestinians and of Gaza.

Anonymous said...

"As the recent war in Gaza demonstrated, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is entering a new and dangerous phase, in which neither side imagines violence as an unpleasant but necessary route to peace, but only as a desperate and furious reaction to the perceived evil of the other."

Among the most morally offensive sentences imaginable.

Anonymous said...

To have written such an essay with no condemnation of the crazed destruction in Gaza, in the wake of just this destruction is nihilism beyond being just shameful.

Anonymous said...

The little wow gold prince was at first quite frightened at the bird, who was like a giant, compared buy cheap wow gold to such a delicate little creature as himself; but cheapest wow gold when he saw Tiny, he was delighted, and thought her the Buy Wow Gold prettiest little maiden he had ever seen. He took wow gold cheap the gold crown from his head, and placed it on hers, and asked her name, and if she would be his wife, and queen over all theflowers."Farewell, farewell," said the swallow, with buy warhammer gold a heavy heart as he left wow power leveling the warm countries to fly back into Denmark. There he had a nest over the window of a house in which dwelt the writer of fairy tales. The
wow7gold swallow sang, "Tweet, tweet," and from his song came the
world of warcraft gold whole story.

Buy wow gold in this site,ibgibg, k4gold and pvpsky .

Litde said...

early 1990s
The 1990s or Nineties was the decade between and including January 1, ..... The recession went on into the early 2000s, bringing an end to the seemingly

Anonymous said...

Still think Israel is or will be nudging towards peace after the horrid election results? The idea of a peace party in Israel has become gravely endangered, while war parties are overwhelmingly triumphant. This is a different Israel than conceived, a colonialist or imperial Israel of no sel-concern or possibly self-awareness only of fierceness.

Anonymous said...

This is the Israel that smashed Gaza, and proud of the smashing and wishing more. How this happened I do not know, but I know this is appalling and beyond shameful.

wow power leveling said...

Why was there no follow on bankruptcy then? The bailout of AIG FP went to (wow power leveling) hedge funds that bound credit swaps on Lehman failing or others betting on rating (wow power leveling) declines. AIG has drained over 100 billion from the government. Which had to go to (wow power leveling) those who bet on failures and downgrades. Many of whom (power leveling)were hedge funds. I-banks that had offsetting swaps needed the money from the AIG bailout or they would have been caught. Its an (wow powerleveling) insiders game and it takes just a little bit too much time for most people to think (wow gold) through where the AIG 100 billion bailout money went to, hedge funds and players, many of whom hire from the top ranks of DOJ, Fed, Treasury, etc. ZHANG XIAO CHEN