Divorced! Divorced! Divorced!
Syrian Civil Society Impowerment 2010
Smoke-free Syria
Jews who call Syria home
0 - Issue 0
Normalization in exchange to settler-ization?
by Ibrahim Hamidi
Six months into the Obama administration, it is clear that one of the ideas floating in Washington circles is: Normalization between Arab states and Israel, in exchange for an end to Israeli settlement in Palestinian territories. During his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier in 2009, Obama stressed that settlements must come to a halt in Palestine. Netanyahu did not respond positively to US pressure, and actually tried playing around it, through Jewish pressure groups in the US, as well as by sending his Defense Minister Ehud Barak to Washington DC, to talk Obama into changing course. This is when the idea came up; normalization in exchange for a settlement halt.
Advocates of this theory claim that when Arab states normalize with Israel, it helps Obama “confront” Netanyahu with a strong argument, in favor of dramatic change vis-à-vis the Arab-Israeli peace process. Normalization with Arab states, they believe, would also empower peace advocates within Israel. Arabs have been sharply divided on this argument, however, into two camps. Advocates believe this will empower Obama, embarrass—or oust—Netanyahu, and maintain the “flame of peace” in the Middle East.
Other Arab states, however, are curtly opposed to any normalization with Israel for a variety of reasons. One is that hard-line cabinets in Israel, like the one we have today, should not be “rewarded” with concessions from the Arab camp. Second, if we were to follow the Arab peace initiative, it calls for complete recognition of the state of Israel by all Arab states, in exchange for complete withdrawal from all Arab territory, occupied in 1967. That withdrawal has not yet taken place.
Amidst sharp division, a third way has emerged, which gives each Arab country the right to take whatever action it sees best regarding relations with Israel. Countries opposed to normalization would not therefore obstruct the efforts of those, who want to normalize. This is apparently what Obama’s Middle East envoy George Mitchell tried to guarantee while he toured the region last July.
Twenty years of Arab-Israeli peace talks have taught us that it is always required for the Arabs to dance to an Israeli tune. When a hard-line Israeli cabinet comes to power, the Arabs are asked to grant concessions, so as to encourage Israel to moderate its behavior. This is exactly what has happened with the Netanyahu cabinet today. When a Labor cabinet wins the elections in Israel, the Arabs are also, required to grant concessions, in order to empower the advocates of peace in Tel Aviv.
Over the past twenty years, several suggestions were put on the table. One was the famous “land-for-peace” formula, on which the Madrid Peace Conference was based in 1991. At one point the Arabs used to say, “withdrawal from Arab land” but now, the requirement is only, “withdrawal from occupied Arab land.” When Yitzhak Rabin came to power in 1992, a new formula was put forth: security-for-peace. Arabs were then asked to cooperate fully, to guarantee the safety of Israel, in its Arab surrounding.
When Shimon Peres came to power in 1996, yet another formula was proposed: peace-for-peace. This envisioned abolishing borders – and economic prosperity for all countries in the Middle East. When Netanyahu was first elected Prime Minister in 1996-1999, he built upon security-related issues to the Arab-Israeli conflict, making them conditional for any final solution. Then came Ehud Barak who juggled between the Palestinian and Syrian track, failing to reach an agreement on either.
Now, that game is apparently over and the Israelis are playing yet another tune: “There is no Arab interlocutor for peace.” Barak withdrew unilaterally from South Lebanon in 2000, then came Ariel Sharon to do the same from the Gaza Strip in 2005, without signing a peace treaty, because they claimed, “there was no Arab partner for peace.”
Nowadays, we hear from the US that peace in the Middle East is a part of America’s national security. The US and the EU are in agreement over one point: a two-state solution, and a need for Israel to stop all settlement expansion, which would be in exchange for normalization with the Arabs.
