Commentary

6th December 1998

Benjamin, this is too much, don’t you think?

By Mervyn de Silva

For Sri Lankans working in the Middle-east last week’s developments in Israel would have brought many nostalgic moments. First, there was a “peace accord” that an overwhelming majority of Israelis, Arabs and Jews, hope and pray would bring peace to Israel and the region.

But there were also sceptics, and critics, more Jewish than Palestinian. Their instant response was so Sri Lankan, and the idiom so, so Singlish.... And this report is from Reuters no less. “When trucks carrying construction materials to the new Netzarim settlement in order to add new housing units for Palestinian families a popular Jewish reaction was “This is too much....” (Perhaps the Reuters stringer in the area did not catch the last word.... “This is too much, No? That would certainly have made Sinhalese readers in Sri Lanka’s North-east, quite at home, in.... in Israel!

Of course the Israeli-Palestinian “peace accord” is not quite the Indo-Sri Lanka “peace accord” which was an agreement between two independent states, one a tiny Indian ocean island and the other the regional superpower. And yet, it is no secret that the Clinton administration played a crucial role, as the indispensable honest broker or mediator. Indeed the final encounter between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat was at Wye, Maryland, an initiative by the White House.

The United States was certainly no casual observer. It has a large Jewish community, an extraordinarily influential Jewish “lobby”.

Long before Israel was “created” by the UN, Baron Rothschild had assumed an important role to establish a Jewish state. The problem was where? Theodore Herzl, the man who had conceived “Israel” was offered Cyprus, and then UGANDA!

Today’s problem is not a state for the Jewish people but the people who are identified as “Palestinians”.

Oil Factor

More is at stake than Israeli or Palestinian interests. As early as 1945, three years before the United Nations created Israel, the Judenstat which Herzl had demanded, a US State Dept. analysis described Saudi Arabia as a “stupendous source of strategic power and one of the greatest prizes in the world”.

Of course the United States has its own petroleum. One of the largest oil companies is known as California-Texas (Caltex). It is hardly surprising that President George Bush, an oil man with his constituency, who launched the Middle-East peace process. As an “oilman” who travelled widely in the Middle-East, he was particularly close to the Saudi royal family which entertained an American military presence. Hence the target of Palestinian Arab as well as Islamic groups. Increasingly it is Hamas that makes the news. This Palestinian organisation does not hesitate to use “terror” against Israeli soldiers and civilians but include Palestinian “traitors” as legitimate targets.

It was in fact the patently terrorist operations of Hamas that has accelerated the peace process. The other is American pressure. Its symbol is US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, a tough cookie, who has made shuttle diplomacy a fine art. Mr. Clinton has other problems, embarrassing problems on his plate - domestic problems, decidedly domestic one is tempted to add.

Oslo Accord

Though a stubborn, wily politician, Mr. Netanyahu knows when he faces an opponent as resourceful as the President of the United States. And so to WYE, Maryland, with the elected leader of the sole superpower as host. Any mediator, seriously committed to a negotiated settlement must know the history of the problem, and why previous attempts at conflict resolution failed. One major breakthrough, was the Norwegian exercise. And Shimon Peres was the right man in the right place. I have mentioned in this column my first interview with Mr. Peres in the Histradut office, the headquarters of the country’s trade union federation. Working through Norwegian trade union leaders, Norway, which has a clean record in this field of neutral, well-intentioned mediation, was able to persuade both Mr. Peres and Chairman Yasser Arafat to meet in Oslo. And thus, the Oslo accords, in the New Middle-East, his autobiography.

Wye Accord

Netanyahu or no Netanyahu, Israel has too much to lose in the “special relationship” with the United States. And the average American voter has other, more serious, problems on his mind than Israel. The American electorate will rush to assist Israel if only its security is seriously threatened. Right now, the only “threat” that Washington recognises is a regional, perhaps even global - the Islamic revival and militancy.

The Clinton administration takes the sensible view that the Islamic threat can be contained if Chairman Arafat, President of the Palestinian Authority, is vested with more power and the PA more territory. Recently, the Israeli Cabinet approved a carefully phased hand-over of West Bank land to the Palestinians. It was the first such gesture by an Israeli administration, and the voting pattern of the multi-party LIKUB-led grand coalition was cause for some anxiety for Prime Minister Netanyahu - seven ministers of the seventeen approved implementation while five said ‘‘NO”. Two were abroad. What did the vote mean? Western correspondents based in Jerusalem argued that it was “a shift away from the ideology of a party whose own anthem still espouses the permanent hold over all of Eretz Israel....’’ (That means greater Israel).

The last transfer (November 20) was 110 sq. meters, about two percent. Another 7.1 percent is already under joint control. Land for peace. What has been the political reaction, across the board? The most interesting I believe is the response of the ultra-right parties in the Netanyahu alliance, and the hard-line Palestinian groups that call it a sell-out by the Arafat leadership.

To meet this onslaught, President Arafat has chosen a platform where he can prove his bona fides to the Palestinian electorate, especially new generation. He concentrates on territory - the West Bank. But will it all add up to over 20-30 percent. I doubt it. 17.9 percent of the West Bank, and partial control of 22.9 percent. This is the State of Palestine? No. It is an invitation to the radicals - Hamas, a child of the Islamic revival led by Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran.

Small Palestine, a municipality, to be confronted by ‘‘Eretz Israel’’, greater Israel.

Hulftsdorp Hill

Editorial/Opinion Contents