Point / Counterpoint: Negotiation antics and trickery

CounterPoint to: 

The power of one

A former Palestinian Authority official told me that in private many officials admit they are just going through the motions of the peace process, waiting for the right moment to change both strategy and goal."

Ben White
New Statesman (London)
August 7, 2008

Is there trickery afoot in the Israel-Palestinian peace negotiations? It shouldn't surprise us if there is, but if so, are the Palestinians sharing their tactics with a journalist from the New Statesman?  And can we read all about their sophistry while the negotiations are still in progress?

New Statesman columnist Ben White leads us to believe that we can. He has revealed that in May, a former Palestinian Authority official told him that "in private, many officials admit they are just going through the motions of the peace process, while waiting for the right moment to change both strategy and goal."

And as if this tidbit is not sensational enough, White also informs us that the Palestinian Authority is considering a unilateral declaration of statehood. Here's what a Palestinian insider told him: "Many agree that it's time to end all this negotiation nonsense and work on peaceful resistance."

This is news that has been slow in reaching the Israeli public, - a rarity in a society where news events often seem to reach the media within seconds of their occurrence. In fact now, months after White's discovery, many Israelis still believe that serious negotiations are taking place. 

Particularly irksome is White's claim that the Palestinians perceive these efforts as "negotiating nonsense."

If the Palestinians do indeed plan to unilaterally declare statehood it wouldn't be their first time. In November 1988, against the backdrop of the wave of violence that swept through the West Bank and the Gaza strip (the first intifada), the PLO issued from Algiers a unilateral declaration of independence. The declaration was mostly ignored by the international community with the exception of a handful of Arab governments.

White tells us that the Palestinians again considered a unilateral declaration of statehood in 2000, but that Israel warned it might respond by annexing swaths of the West Bank - a threat, says White "that would ring hollow this time around, as it [Israel] is already busy doing just that." Hence he concludes that if senior Palestinian officials decide to "go it alone", it would be hard to blame them.

According to this twisted logic, concessions are expected from Israel in return for peace negotiations, rather than for a peace agreement. Israel has always maintained that Jews have a right to live in any region of historical Israel, but has remained mindful of the common Israeli maxim that it is better to be smart than right. Thus, Israel has not annexed parts of the West Bank precisely because it prefers a negotiated settlement to unilateral measures - a principle that has merit only if accepted by both sides.

White goes on to quote political analyst Ali Jarbawi who believes that "waiting [to declare statehood] until the end of the year is best" and will allow the Palestinians to avoid blame for the talks' collapse. White then explains that these ideas are driven by the Palestinians' increasing perception that the peace process and the Palestinian Authority itself simply provide "a cover for Israeli occupation and land seizure with a pretence of 'interim' autonomy."   

These views do not correlate well with the latest information being leaked from the negotiating teams, according to which the Palestinians have just offhandedly rejected a rather equitable proposal - the removal of Israeli settlements from some 93% of the West Bank, with land swaps for the remaining 7%.  (The overwhelming majority of Israeli settlers are located on about 7% of the West Bank territory in proximity to the original 'green line').

If these leaks are true - and they haven't been denied by either side - then it would certainly seem that an agreement is within reach (though there still remains the difficult issue of Jerusalem, which the parties have agreed to leave till last).

Negotiation antics aside, we should reasonably have expected to hear something positive from the sides. It would be good, not just for the general atmosphere, but also for the public on both sides of the conflict who are yearning for some positive news.

But Ben White is encouraging us to believe something very different. He informs us that the Palestinian Authority is considering stopping all negotiations with Israel and severing diplomatic contact, unilaterally declaring Palestinian statehood, or removing their security forces, which "act as a cover for humiliating Israeli military operations, from West Bank cities" - a move suggested by the Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad.

Unless we have all been mislead and in reality no significant progress has been made, these are highly counterproductive statements.  Indeed, they are far more a threat to the Palestinians themselves than to Israel. In an AP interview, Salam Fayyad listed among his achievements since taking office, a greater sense of security in the once chaotic West Bank cities. That is one Palestinian achievement that may well fall victim to this new Palestinian strategy. And in all likelihood, it is not the only one.