In a bid to revive the moribund peace process between the Palestinians and the Israelis, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius visited the Middle East for the fourth time since 2012. He started his tour in Egypt on Saturday, 20 June, where he met President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi, and the secretary-general of the Arab League. From Cairo, he headed to Jordan and then Ramallah and Israel on 21 June. Before Fabius's arrival in Israel, the Israeli prime minister, in a cabinet meeting, did what he has mastered throughout the years; namely, to rehash the mantra that his country will refuse what he termed “international diktat”, and that the security of Israel is not properly taken into account by the international community. He stressed that the only means to reach a final settlement with the Palestinians is through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. The irony is that the most important condition that the French foreign minister highlighted in remarks before beginning his tour was that it is absolutely necessary to safeguard Israel's security in any final deal to settle the Palestinian question. The problem with this concept of Israel's security, however, is the lack of a precise definition of what would assure such a security. The Israeli point of view is that the borders of Israel in any final settlement must be defendable, which if translated in geographical terms would mean to keep as much Palestinian territory as possible. In other words, the security of the Jewish state is an open invitation to more annexation of occupied Palestinian lands under the Israeli settlement policy. The international community has accepted, through Security Council resolutions, the idea of the two-state solution, Israel and Palestine, but the ever-expanding Israeli colonisation in the West Bank would render such a solution impossible. And this is a point that Fabius emphasised during his talks with Arab leaders during his tour. The other point was the importance of resuming direct Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations. He said that over the past 40 years we have seen negotiations between the two sides, but these negotiations have not led to an agreement. So the idea is to work for the resumption of peace talks under international supervision and aim to reach a final settlement within a period of 18 to 24 months. The French government is open to the idea of discussing a draft resolution in the Security Council sometime next autumn. This resolution would lay down the parameters for a final peace accord and set a target date to conclude peace negotiations. To go to the Security Council with such a draft would need close coordination with the permanent members of the Security Council, and more particularly the United States. Last December, the Security Council failed to pass a draft resolution submitted by Jordan, the Arab state on the council, because Washington deemed the draft unbalanced. If the French government decides to submit a draft, one might expect not only the language to be different but also the outcome, as Washington may have more trouble alienating a key European Union ally. What are the chances of such a resolution being adopted? Supposing that the French, in light of talks Fabius had with leaders he met on this tour, go to the United Nations to revive the peace negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis, I would venture to say that the exercise would not be easy. For one thing, the present Israeli government is not, by any measure, a pro-peace government. On the contrary, it is a government that will only endure if the present colonisation of the Palestinian territories continues unabated. The Israeli prime minister himself said during the last election earlier this year that if he was re-elected he would not support the establishment of a Palestinian state. On the other hand, his argument about Israeli security is, unfortunately, magnified by unsettling developments in the Middle East and the expansion of transborder terrorism. Fighting this kind of terrorism has become an absolute priority for major powers, to the detriment of the Palestinian cause. The latter has been suffering from inter-Palestinian infighting that does not seem likely to subside anytime soon. US support for such a move by France is absolutely necessary if a resolution submitted by the French government is to pass at the Security Council. However, the administration of President Barack Obama, which still has almost 17 months to go, will not be enthusiastic about getting involved in another bout of bickering with the Israeli prime minister, especially if the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan signed between the P5+1 and Iran leads to a final agreement by 30 June. I am not sure the Obama administration would decide to spend political capital on the resumption of peace talks in the Middle East. It may prefer to leave the peace process to the next US president. Peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis seems to be far off, unfortunately. Present and future challenges to the security and stability of the regional order in the Middle East are the main obstacles hampering efforts to encourage the resumption of negotiations on a two-state solution, which remains the only practical strategy to bring peace, security and stability to the region. The writer is a former assistant to the Egyptian foreign minister.
