Down to a simmer

Since the deal brokered between the Israelis and the Palestinians by the CIA chief, Mr. George Tenet, there has been a drop in the violence. But, says Kesava Menon,there are few guarantees that it will last.

THERE HAS been a sharp drop in the levels of violence between Israelis and Palestinians ever since both sides accepted the ``Security Implementation Work Plan'' that was brokered by the CIA chief, Mr. George Tenet, on June 13. Neither side has mentally discarded its maximalist position and stray incidents of violence have occurred since the agreement was forged. But if this tenuous peace holds the next week should see the U.S. Secretary of State, Gen. Colin Powell, push the West Asian antagonists to the next phase of the renewed effort at co- existence.

Mr. Tenet really got down to work after each side had unilaterally declared a ceasefire. The Israeli declaration came soon after the international committee headed by the former U.S. Senator, Mr. George Mitchell, submitted its report. A ceasefire was the primary demand that the Mitchell committee had demanded of both sides. The Palestinian Authority President, Mr. Yasser Arafat, had a valid reason for not reciprocating immediately - he wanted a freeze on construction activity in Jewish settlements to be imposed concurrently - but his delay carried a political cost. A suicide bomb attack in Tel Aviv which killed 22 Israelis occurred between the submission of the Mitchell report and Mr. Arafat's ceasefire call. The balance of international opinion had tilted in Israel's favour by the time Mr. Arafat issued his call. When Mr. Arafat did order his people to desist from attacking (or as they would say counter-attacking) Israelis it appeared that he did so under international pressure.

The Palestinians would consider it unfair that the Tel Aviv bomb incident should be viewed in isolation from the cycle of violence that has rocked the territory for the past nine months. But its occurrence after the submission of the Mitchell report, which was widely viewed as the last chance for a peace between the two sides, made it a singularly different event. It was also the sort of event that seemed set to provoke (and possibly justify) the massive action that Israel has threatened for a long time. So when Mr. Arafat did order the ceasefire it appeared as if he had done so out of fear. In retrospect, Mr. Arafat might have actually welcomed such an Israeli strike since it would have tilted international opinion back in his favour again and perhaps have led to the fulfilment of the Palestinian demand for the posting of an international observer force in the territories. But U.S. and European leaders persuaded Mr. Arafat not to run the risk.With both sides declaring ceasefire, the first phase of the four-phase plan for normalisation recommended by the Mitchell committee was started. The committee had recommended that after a ceasefire the two sides should observe a cooling-off period, undertake confidence-building measures and then finally resume negotiations on substantive issues. This last phase is not likely to arrive any time soon even if the two intermediate stages are somehow implemented. When considered in detail the Tenet plan basically tries to tackle the intermediate phases.

Under the Tenet plan, Israel had to revoke its pro-active policy of intruding into Palestinian territory to interdict militants before they carried out any action. (Since it would have been very difficult to pinpoint what sort of movement on the Palestinian side amounted to a threatened strike this policy left a lot of leeway to junior level troops and the potential for misguided action was immense). Israel's Prime Minister, Mr. Ariel Sharon, had announced a revocation of the pro-active policy along with his ceasefire order and the Tenet agreement sought to cement this position.

Israel was also asked, under the Tenet plan, to ease its stranglehold on Palestinian towns and villages, to open the international crossing points into Palestinian territory and allow freer movement of Palestinian civilians. Once the situation had begun to settle down Israel was to re-deploy its troops, especially its armour, to the positions they were in before the Palestinian uprising started in late September last year. Israel was also to clear some outposts that Jewish settlers had set up on hillsides in the West Bank. Somewhere down the line Israel was to finally announce a freeze on all construction activity in the settlements. This freeze on construction activity is the major demand of the Palestinians and a cessation of the current hostility will only occur when such a freeze is put into effect.

For its part, the Palestinian Authority was asked to order the personnel of its myriad security forces to desist from attacking Israelis. They were also asked to interdict militants from the ``national and religious forces'' who were trying to launch attacks (including suicide bomb attacks) inside Israel or against the settlers. The Palestinians were also to wind up the hostile propaganda or incitement against Israel in their media. Palestinian security officials were to work with their Israeli counterparts to ensure that not just armed attacks but hostile demonstrations too were contained. U.S. officials were to be represented on a joint committee that would supervise these arrangements. For all its good intentions, the Tenet plan left ambiguities that both sides were happy to exploit. Israel was demanding impossible standards of compliance from the Palestinians when they said they would make no move on the settlement freeze unless all acts of violence were ended. On their side, the Palestinians were demanding a complete freeze on construction activity in the settlements even before the ceasefire had begun to take hold. Meanwhile, extremists on both sides had declared their opposition to the implementation of the Tenet plan and over the last week there have been reports that Jewish West Bank settlers, like their counterparts among Palestinian extremists, were launching attacks on civilians on the other side. By the weekend, the ceasefire was just about holding but there were few guarantees that it would last.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Dragging it on and on... and down?
Next     : Castles in the air?