Setback amidst hope for peace

TWO MESSENGERS OF peace, drastically different as wielders of power, have come and gone leaving the Middle East no nearer hope than it has been in half a century and more. It was not Pope John Paul II's mission to coax the warring nations of the region back to the negotiating table in a herculean effort to bring an end to decades of violence and misery. His was a pilgrimage to bring the healing touch to the region seeped in the bitterness and hatred of countless centuries. He was welcomed as a man of peace, revered by the followers of the major religions of the world which have their fount in the Middle East. A deeply divided people united in a show of solidarity with the aging Pontiff. It was a response whose spontaneity reflected the region's longing for peace forged in the fires of religious, political and sectarian battles. The other peace messenger was the itinerant American President who, for the absence of the domestic platform in an election year, has been exerting himself on behalf of the beleaguered people in different regions.

There was never any doubt that the Papal visit to the Promised Land would be a grand success despite the fears over his security in the hate-filled region. Beginning in the predominantly Islamic land of Jordan and covering all the sites sacred to Islam, Christianity and Judaism, the Pope's tour was historic and brave. There was more than just symbolism - not that symbolism had any less value in religious affairs - in his visits to Jerusalem, including the Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem in a homage to the Jewish victims of Hitler's war, Nazareth where secularists won a great victory when the Israeli Government last year approved the building of a mosque in the shadow of a basilica, and Bethlehem on the West Bank where he proclaimed his support for a Palestinian homeland. The Pope's visit to a Palestinian refugee camp where he deplored the continued statelessness of these dispossessed people must go down as among the highlights of his tour.

The American President, during a quickly arranged meeting with his Syrian counterpart, Mr. Hafez al-Assad, in neutral Geneva hoped to infuse life into the crucial Syria-Israel track of the peace process. It was a rare meeting since Mr. Assad hardly leaves his country on any mission, but the two Presidents failed to find meeting ground. Mr. Assad refused to compromise on the return of the captured Golan Heights, his main demand during peace talks with Israel which have stalled after resuming on a note of promise. The failure of the summit must be deemed a major setback for the whole peace process since the Syrian track holds the key to termination of hostilities between Israel and Lebanon. Israel has announced it is pulling out its occupation army from southern Lebanon by this summer. The fear is that Syria may provoke anti-Israeli actions in Lebanon and sabotage the Israeli withdrawal if it finds there is no movement forward over the Golan Heights issue. The stalemate over Syria comes at what appears to be a momentous time in the region with the majority Israelis and their moderate Prime Minister, Mr. Ehud Barak, ready to push their land-for-peace policy. Considering the wild swings between hope and despair that the Middle East has seen, there may be no need to turn alarmist and proclaim the end of the peace process. Besides, the time constraints on the main actors, Mr. Yasser Arafat, Mr. Assad and Mr. Clinton, whose term at the helm is to end in nine months, can still prove a powerful motive for salvage action.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Realising India's potential
Next     : Some hard choices