A poll on peace?

Elections in Israel are likely to be held in February. KESAVA MENON takes a look at the contestants and the prospects for West Asian peace.

TWO FORMER army Generals and a Captain, all three of them special forces types, appear set to be the chief contenders in the Israeli elections likely to be held in February. It goes without saying that those who have exposed themselves to the greatest physical risk in the conduct of public affairs should be entitled to run for the highest office in the land. But perceptive Israelis point out that their country can never be a normal one so long as a candidate's competence and dedication in security matters outweigh all other considerations in the minds of his electors.

It is not of course merely tradition, which teaches the Jews that they are a nation apart, or a history of being persecuted that hones the Israelis' sensitivity to their security. They are currently living in a tough neighbourhood that might have been getting a little easier but, as events of the past three months have shown, can still be extremely volatile. The force of this racial memory makes them overlook one of the most significant facts of the current Palestinian uprising. Over three months of violent confrontation there have barely been two or three attacks on Israelis inside Israel proper. Most of the Palestinian anger has been directed at Israelis who wander about the Palestinian territories - soldiers and residents of the illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

This one fact seems to amply prove the Palestinian claim that they have made the strategic choice for peace. They recognise Israel's right to exist on 80 per cent of the territory that was British-mandated Palestine till 1948 and are only asking for the right to set up their state on the remaining 20 per cent. The fact that the Palestinians have made this major concession - a far more significant concession than the slices of territory that Israel has conceded to the Palestinians so far - has yet to sink into the Israeli psyche. It also might not ever sink in so long as there are Israeli politicians and writers who keep looking for the slightest evidence that the Arabs have not given up their long-term goal of erasing Israel from the map of West Asia.

Among the new evidence that has been drummed up in support of this thesis is a speech that the Palestinian Authority President, Mr. Yasser Arafat, is reported to have delivered at Cairo University a few months ago. Mr. Arafat is reported to have said that the peace deals that he had made or would be making with the Israelis should be viewed as equivalent to the Hudaibiyya agreement made in the early days of Islam. The doctrine underlying the treaty that the early Muslims made at the place called Hudaibiyya was that they were not strong enough to overwhelm their opponents and so must make an interim peace till they had built up the strength to achieve their ambitions.

It is possible that Mr. Arafat might have merely been playing to the gallery at a difficult time and to explain his position to his fellow Arabs at a time of transition between confrontation and a possible peace. However, the speech produced the immediate reflexive response from a section of Israeli society that with the Arab objectives being such Israel would be stupid to give up the strategic assets - the high ground in the West Bank, the Jordan valley and the Gaza Strip junctions - that it currently holds. With the uprising of the last three months, especially with its spread to the Israeli Arabs, those propagating this view have found a more receptive audience.

Yet, opinion polls consistently show that a very definite majority of Israelis are in favour of peace with the Palestinians. This majority opinion holds despite the categorical clarity of the Palestinian position that they will not end their confrontation with Israel unless Israel ends its occupation of all the territory captured in the 1967 war including East Jerusalem. If the Palestinian terms for peace are so clear and yet a majority of Israelis still favour a peace, then the logical conclusion is that a majority of Israelis support the acceptance of the Palestinian terms. Unfortunately politics rarely follows such a logical or linear path.

Neither Captain Benjamin Netanyahu nor General Ariel Sharon, the two right-wing politicians jostling to become the main rival to General Ehud Barak in the elections, will make a peace on the Palestinian terms. Mr. Netanyahu leads Mr. Barak by a sizeable margin in the opinion polls and Mr. Sharon by a slight one. This fact should lead to a conclusion, opposite to the one made above, that a majority of Israelis are not in favour of major land transfers and that they are not, therefore, in a mood to meet the Palestinians terms. But that conclusion too does not seem to be quite on the mark.

From the moves he has made over the past one and a half years, Mr. Barak appears to be inching towards the realisation that a peace can only be made on the Palestinian's terms. He cannot and will not, of course, say so, but he is still prepared to make a deal and realistically-speaking this is the only basis on which a peace can be made. If Mr. Barak still calculates that a peace deal is the only achievement that will ensure his re-election, and if a number of sober and serious Israeli analysts agree with him, then the overall logic of the situation ought to be that a majority of Israelis will accept a deal that is honourable and has enough in it to guarantee their security.

Perhaps the only way in which Israelis can be induced to believe in their long-term security is by making them aware of the other possibilities that are open to them beyond their security concerns. An Israel that can enter into cooperative economic and social relations with its neighbours should logically be one that is more secure. The former commando, Mr. Barak has to now prove that he can develop such a vision and convey it convincingly to his people.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Accountability exiled
Next     : An accord of unequals