FrontPage

Nation

World

Media

Culture

Technology

Commentary

Israel News Digest

Julie Stahl, Christian Friends of Israel, Jerusalem
August 2000

POWERS OF PERSUASION

Down to the wire at Camp David, Jerusalem, the city of peace, became the stumbling block over which -- if not all the world -- at least Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the United States stumbled. But U.S. President Bill Clinton was not about to allow thousands of years of passionate history over a city spoil one of his last chances to gain a legacy as a Middle East peacemaker.

As we go to press, Clinton, who postponed his trip by a day to a G-8 summit in Japan to try to forge an agreement, has left Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and PA Chairman Yasser Arafat at Camp David to continue with another round of talks in his absence under the guidance of U.S. Secretary of State Made-leine Albright.

An hour and a half after the White House announced that the summit had failed to achieve an agreement, Clinton backtracked and said that the leaders had agreed to stay and continue talks. Characterizing the substance at the summit as "the hardest peace issues I have ever dealt with," Clinton said they were remaining at Camp David because "nobody wanted to give up."

But the President warned that the summit was "really, really hard" and the extension of the talks was no guarantee that an agreement would be reached to end the generations old conflict between Jews and Arabs.White House spokesman Joe Lockhart shed light on the turn-around in the talks, which had been slated for collapse the previous day. The President, he said, had "used every ounce of his power of persuasion that he had avail-able to him and then some that he didn’t know he had," and still they decided to leave the summit.

If that was his last play, it certainly worked to keep the negotiations going at least while he was away. The administration was afraid that if the talks were allowed to recess and the leaders leave, there would be endless media leaks and any advantage they had gained in the talks would be lost.

MOUNTING PRESSURE

In a letter to Clinton, Barak wrote that to his sorrow, he had "come to the conclusion that the Palestinian side is conducting negotiations insincerely and is not willing to negotiate in a serious and practical manner for a permanent peace between us."

Although Barak had been willing to hand over Arab neighborhoods in and around Jerusalem to some degree of PA control, sources said, he refused to give in when it came to the Old City. Arafat demanded nothing less than full sovereignty over eastern Jerusalem including the Old City, particularly the Temple Mount and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Analysts have been quick to put a positive spin on the talks. They have said that even if no agreement is reached by the end of the summit that began on July 11 at Camp David, the two sides have taken a giant leap forward by putting the hot issues of Jerusalem and refugees officially on the table for the first time.

After seven years of negotiating according to the plan of the Oslo Accords, which left discussions on the most vital and sensitive issues until the end, Israelis and Palestinians know the pattern well: the PA "responds" to some alleged Israeli intransigence, the talks break down, Israel makes a concession, the talks revive and an agreement is reached.

Clinton had hoped that the atmosphere and history of Camp David would inspire the negotiators to come to an agreement and thus land him his much-needed legacy as Middle East peacemaker. It worked for former U.S. President Jimmy Carter in 1978, when he hosted the late Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat at the presidential retreat. After 12 days sequestered together, Begin and Sadat signed the Camp David Accords, which led to the first peace treaty between Israel and an Arab nation the following year.

The original Camp David Accords entailed two agreements, one of which contained the seeds for the current negotiations between Israel and the PA. The first was a framework for dealing with the Sinai and achieving a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, which was fulfilled. The second was a framework for establishing Middle East peace by conducting negotiations for the founding of an autonomy regime in the "West Bank" and Gaza. Later, Begin, Sadat and Carter each interpreted it differently.

IT’S ALL ABOUT MONEY

The support of U.S. Jews is vital to the process because they form the basis for the Jewish lobby to Congress. The support of Congress for any peace deal is necessary in order to get money to make the deal work.

Media reports emerged during the summit that Clinton had been canvassing Congress to assess the possibility of obtaining approval for a giant aid package needed to cement an Israeli-PA "peace" deal. Sources said that Israel is asking for some $15 billion to move military bases and borders as well as beef up security and the PA is requesting some $40 billion, primarily to resettle and compensate refugees. Washington expects that some of its wealthier allies like Japan, the European Union and Saudi Arabia will contribute to the package.

BARAK BUCKLES UNDER U.S. PRESSURE

Fitted on a Russian plane, the radar system is believed to be more powerful than the similar American-made AWACS system. American Defense officials feared that the powerful spy plane could be used against U.S. forces in the Far East in the event of a confrontation between China and U.S. ally Taiwan.

Fair enough. Israel stated repeatedly during the past months that it was not interested in doing anything that would harm American interests or bilateral relations. But Israeli officials estimated that what was really bothering the Americans was the competition to its own defense industry.

The deal, signed in 1996, would have netted the Israel Defense industry $250 million dollars now, with the Chinese option to purchase additional spy planes for up to $2 billion. Defense experts say that Israel’s defense industry cannot survive and develop without lucrative exports.

Influential Congressmen, normally supportive of Israel, threatened to dock American aid to Israel in the amount of the deal if the sale went through. The incident led to an unprecedented rift in relations between the U.S. Congress and Israel, ahead of the summit. Israel’s defense has become more dependent on American dollars than it has ever been, which critics say has reined in Israel’s independence.

IN THE DARK

Before talks on Jerusalem broke down, Israeli media reports had suggested that an agreement on Jerusalem was near. Israel would annex the satellite settlement communities of Givat Ze’ev, Ma’aleh Adumim and Gush Etzion in exchange for granting municipal or some degree of control of Arab neighborhoods in and around Jerusalem to the PA. But Arafat is demanding that he reign in eastern Jerusalem.

The PA insisted that Israel resettle some 3.6 million Palestinian refugees and their descendants within Israel’s sovereign borders or compensate those who did not wish to return. In addition to the logistical nightmare involved in absorbing more than half again its population, receiving millions of Arabs would effectively wipe out the Jewish character of the Jewish state.

While an Israeli compromise included the possibility of absorbing elderly Palestinians who wanted to die in the villages in which they were born, Israel has been careful to stand firm against accepting any moral responsibility for the plight of the refugees. The idea of establishing an international compensation and resettlement fund for the refugees has been proposed.

It seems fairly certain that Barak is willing to concede some 95 percent of Judea and Samaria, most if not all of the Gaza Strip and the entire Jordan Valley to the PA. As Barak envisions it, 60 to 80 percent of the settlers in Judea and Samaria would be gathered together in blocs under Israeli sovereignty, while another 50,000 would be transferred or relocated to new homes.

Politicians on the left and right have expressed their shock at Barak’s apparent willingness to turn over the strategic Jordan Valley or possibly settle half a million Palestinian refugees there. Every Israeli government since 1967 operated on the premise that the Jordan Valley was necessary to ensure Israel’s security by providing a buffer between the tens of millions of Arabs to the east and the Arab population in the territories and within Israel.

Going into the summit, Arafat has said that 95 percent is not enough -- he will stop at nothing less than 100 percent of the "West Bank" and Gaza. He has expressed willingness to consider an Israeli proposal to exchange land inside sovereign Israel for territories on which settlements have been built, which Israel wants to keep.

SINKING SHIP

Sharansky had warned earlier that he believed Barak had no solid "red lines" over which he would not cross when negotiating on the vital issues of Jerusalem, settlements, Palestinian refugees and final borders. Sharansky, who was not opposed to compromise with the PA, urged Barak to establish a broad-based coalition government prior to leaving for Washington in order to establish a national consensus for reaching an agreement.

But Barak rejected any talk of inviting the rightwing Likud party into his government and subsequently lost not only Sharansky’s four-member Yisrael B’Aliyah faction but also the five-member National Religious Party, supported by many of the settlers, and the 17-member Shas faction. Just hours before his departure, Barak narrowly escaped defeat in two no-confidence motions in the Knesset, in which a majority voted against him but the opposition did not garner the needed 61-vote absolute majority to bring the government down.

With the support of only a shrunken cabinet and a minority in the Knesset backing his trip to the summit, Barak turned to the people pledging that he would only return with an agreement that would "strengthen" Israel. "It is the people who have sent me, who have given me my mandate and only the people," Barak said, scorning the Knesset.

Barak is counting on a referendum to pass any agreement that he might be able to make. There are differing opinions as to whether or not the law allows him to bypass the Knesset and go straight to the people. He has already given the go ahead to prepare for a national poll.

Whether an agreement can win a majority is another question. When Barak left, polls showed that he had the support of 52-53 percent of the people for his "peace-making" moves. However, that does not necessarily represent the Jewish majority vote.

Opponents of the so-called peace process fear that the majority of Israelis might get swept up in the euphoria surrounding a deal and those that would have sensibly voted against it might vote in favor of it. With the promise of billions of dollars in U.S. aid and the spotlight of the world on them, they might also feel intimidated to give their "amen" to such an agreement.

Barak’s summit adventure also served to highlight the deep divisions within Israeli society. As many as a quarter of a million people -- primarily settlers and religious Jews -- gathered at Rabin Square in Tel Aviv in a massive show of protest against Barak’s attendance at the summit. They fear he is willing to make concessions that will harm their security and displace many of them. An earlier gathering of thousands of Jews at the Western Wall prayed that Barak would not divide Jerusalem.

Left-wing demonstrators have also consolidated their efforts. Under the umbrella of a brand-new "Peace Coalition" they say they will support and accept any agreement that Barak brings home that the Palestinians also accept.

BEEFING UP THE BATTLE LINES

As the summit got under way, Arafat also attempted to rally sup-port from Palestinian opposition factions, by inviting them to join him at the summit. The invitation, which angered White House officials initially, was rejected by Hamas but three other groups took Arafat up on the offer.

Suleiman An-Najab of the People’s party (communist party) and Samir Ghosheh, a former PA minister from the Popular Struggle Front flew to Washington with Taysir Khalid of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Khalid, who has rejected talks with Israel, accepted Arafat’s invitation to join him as an advisor.

However, the delegation left Washington less than a week after they had arrived, having been prevented from meeting with Arafat by U.S. officials. The DFLP as well as the Popular Struggle Front were until recently both included in the U.S. State Department’s annual report on global terrorism. The DFLP participated in what is known as the 1974 Maalot massacre in which a busload of Israeli school children was hijacked and 25 people were murdered.

The strategy of calling for back-up worked. When it came to Jerusalem, Arafat was able to declare that he had no mandate from the Palestinians, Arab or Muslim world to make concessions or compromises regarding Jerusalem.

Meanwhile, back in Gaza, Arafat’s Fatah faction called for a State of Emergency. Residents there started stockpiling supplies as the summit was beginning, fearing that a breakdown in the talks could lead to violent clashes between Israel and the Palestinians.

Palestinian media also started publicizing the fact that the PA is training Palestinian youth for battle. According to a report in the official PA newspaper Al-Hayat-al-Jadida, monitored by the Palestinian Media Watch, some 1,800 teens aged 14-18 are attending six summer camps in which they are learning how to shoot, dismantle and assemble automatic weapons; storm, attack and defend a position; and how to administer first aid.

TROUBLE AHEAD

Another strategy formulated by the PA, would send masses of unarmed women and children to storm settlements in order to seize land. The Israeli army has been issuing rubber bullets and anti-riot equipment and briefing settlers on how to withstand an unarmed mob. Such a surge of popular protest could quickly gain the sympathies of the world media and international community, especially if unarmed Palestinian women and children were wounded or killed in the action.

Meanwhile, a senior Israeli military officer went public with a warning that establishing a Palestinian state in the middle of the country could return Israel to the same vulnerability that it had during the 1948 war of independence. Lt.-Col. Moshe Hager said that a PA state would be like a "Trojan Horse for a future Saladin for the Arab countries," by rising up and preventing Israel from responding effectively if attacked. (Saladin was the Islamic military commander who captured Jerusalem from the Crusaders in 1187.)

UNILATERAL

The PCC said the decision was based on "the Palestinian people’s natural and historical right to establish their state" as well as the 1988 Palestine National Council declaration of statehood and United Nations resolutions 242, 338 and 181. It emphasized the need to "demolish" all Israeli settlements on "occupied" Palestinian lands, the position of Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state and said that "peace will be achieved only with its return and liberation from Israeli occupation."

Israeli lawmakers later moved to counter the effects of a uni-lateral Palestinian declaration by passing two private members’ bills against such an action. The first, calls for Israeli jurisdiction and administration to be extended over Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza where some 200,000 Israelis live. The second proposal called for Israel to abrogate the Oslo Accords if the PA unilaterally declared statehood.

OTHER NEWS: DERI APPEAL REJECTED

Deri will be the first Cabinet minister to be sent to jail. Shas supporters charged that Deri had received "a bum rap" from the secular court system and that he was a victim of Ashkenazi (Jews of European origin) persecution of the Sephardic (Jews of Middle Eastern or Spanish origin) Jews. A series of farewell rallies, which threatened to divide the country along cultural lines, was cancelled after the first one.

PRESIDENT QUITS

Weizman is the nephew of Israel’s first president, Chaim Weiz-mann. Trained in Great Britain’s Royal Air Force, Weizman was one of the founders of the Israel Air Force. After more than two decades in the military he went into politics and retired in 1992 because of what he considered a lack of progress in the Arab-Israeli "peace process." In 1993, he was elected President and was reelected in 1998 for a second five-year term.

Weizman’s resignation paves the way for the likely election of Oslo architect Shimon Peres as Israel’s next president. Although the post of President is largely ceremonial, it has become increasingly politicized during the past seven years of the Oslo process.

Likud party member Moshe Katsav, a Sephardic Jew -- Israel has never had a Sephardic president -- is running against Peres for the post. Elections will be held in the Knesset within a few weeks.

BREAKING THE SILENCE

The ten Jews were sentenced by an Iranian military court to between four and 13 years in prison. International pressure was credited for the fact that none of the Jews received the death penalty. Israel called the trials a "farcical procedure" and condemned the verdict "against innocent Jews, whose only sin is their Jewish origin."

Iranian affairs experts both inside and outside of Iran have forecast that the guilty verdict may cause a mass exodus of Iran’s Jewish community, which numbers about 25,000 and is the largest in the Middle East outside of Israel.

MUD FROM THE TAP

Julie Stahl is the Jerusalem Bureau Chief for CNSNews.com

Search the Web.

Daniel
The Key to Prophetic Revelation
by John Walvoord
This masterpiece by noted Bible scholar John Walvoord presents the beauties of Daniel's prophecies in the light of modern archaeological evidence.