In Algiers, Dina Ezzat examines the agenda of the 2005 Arab Summit and takes stock of 60 years of chequered pan-Arabism, interviewing key contemporary players and profiling past luminaries Palestine in use Jordan insisted it was promoting a new realism. Others differed. But one thing is clear -- the Palestinian question remains the Arab World's toughest, and most divisive, issue In 1946 the leaders of the then seven independent Arab states met in Alexandria for their first ever summit. Their aim was to agree to a collective Arab reaction to the waves of Jewish migration to Palestine that came in the wake of WW II. It was with the declared mandate of preserving the rights of the Palestinian people that the League of Arab States was created in 1945. Sixty years later 22 Arab states -- with Palestine under Israeli occupation and Iraq under the occupation of over 150,000 US and other foreign troops -- are again meeting, this time to discuss ways of helping Palestinians in Gaza and parts of the West Bank end the aggressive Israeli control of their lives and begin to establish an independent- but-temporary Palestinian state on less than 20 per cent of historic Palestinian territories. In and out of the meeting rooms in Algiers Arab leaders and foreign ministers offered a collective stamp of approval for the Sharm El-Sheikh understandings and the increasingly non-confrontational approach in dealing with Israel adopted by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Arab leaders, in line with commitments made during the London conference earlier this month, promised to upgrade financial aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) to encourage Abbas's moves to reform the PA's bureaucratic and security apparatus. The Algiers summit hinted to the international community that Arab countries are moving closer to accepting a final status agreement with Israel that accommodates Israel's rejection of Palestinian control over Arab East Jerusalem and its refusal to allow four million Palestinian refugees the legal, if not actual, right of return. "This was intended to be the summit that put paid to Palestinian demands, legitimate by international standards, for control over East Jerusalem, occupied in 1967. It was also meant to end legitimate Palestinian demands for a fair and legal settlement to the right of return to their home towns or else adequate compensation in accordance with UN Resolution 194," commented a senior Palestinian diplomat. The attempt to avoid any direct reference to East Jerusalem or to UN Resolution 194 was spearheaded by Jordan, considered by many to be Israel's closest Arab friend. During the past few weeks Jordan's King Abdullah has advocated a new sense of realism to his Arab counterparts. The rationale, Jordanian diplomatic sources in Algeria suggested, is that it is too late for the Palestinians, and Arabs in general, to think they can regain control over East Jerusalem or send back millions of refugees to hometowns that are now Israeli cities and ports. The only way out of the Palestinian dilemma the king -- who missed the summit -- said, is to accept that they can only get what Israel is willing to offer, with some minor amendments. "It is time to adopt a new approach towards our issues. We lost a great deal because we failed to see what was going on around us. If we keep on doing this we will sustain more losses," said one Jordanian diplomat. The king drafted a proposal beneath an acceptable Arab umbrella, reviving the Arab Peace Initiative adopted in 2002 after it was suggested by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, though omitting any reference to East Jerusalem or UN resolution 194. Jordanian officials preparing for the summit in the Algerian capital said their proposal did not overlook legitimate Palestinian rights. "We speak about international legitimacy in our proposal. This includes all relevant UN resolutions and other international mandates," said Jordanian Foreign Minister Hani El- Molqi, speaking to the press following the opening session of the summit's preparatory foreign ministers meeting at which the Jordanian proposal was given a cool reception. Al-Molqi, like other Jordanian diplomats, avoided uttering the words UN Resolution 194 or East Jerusalem. Jordanian diplomatic sources claimed Amman was trying to help other Arab capitals find a way out of impossible demands. The time has come, they argued, for the Arabs to tell the world that they are pursuing a realistic answer to the Palestinian question in line with the regional and international balance of power. "It is time that Arab countries addressed the world -- the US and influential Western capitals -- in language that reflects an awareness of the political facts of 2005," said the Jordanian source. Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly on the fringe of the Arab foreign ministers meeting that opened in the Algerian capital on Saturday to prepare for the Tuesday-to-Wednesday Arab summit, many diplomats conceded that the Jordanian proposal indicates a new sense of realism. But it was, some argued, a premature realism, while others said it verged on a defeatism the Arab public was unwilling to accept. As one Palestinian diplomat commented -- taking the moral high ground on the Palestinian issue is the only tactic left for Arab leaders seeking to contain the anger of populations increasingly frustrated by their autocratic governments. "They like to talk in public about Palestinian rights even when they are doing nothing for the Palestinian people under occupation," he said. "The proposal did not pick up from the beginning," he added. According to the source the Egyptian delegation was unenthusiastic but did not advise the Jordanians against it because Cairo does not want to be perceived by Amman as attempting to monopolise Arab mediation of the Palestinian cause. The Saudis did not like it. Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah reportedly told the Jordanian monarch that his proposal drained the Arab Peace Initiative of any balance. During the pre-summit deliberations the Syrian and Lebanese delegations categorically opposed the Jordanian proposal and vowed to block it should it fail to include references to Resolution 194 and East Jerusalem. "The Syrians are bridling under Jordanian pressure to pull troops out of Lebanon. They have no reason to cooperate with Amman on this matter, especially given they will receive no particular political rewards in return," commented one senior Arab diplomat. The resolution had to be either amended or withdrawn. It was only because the proposal was redrafted to include clear references to East Jerusalem and UN Resolution 194 that it was spared from being binned. Nasser Al-Qodwa, the new Palestinian foreign minister, worked on the re-drafting. The result, though, Al-Qodwa argued on Saturday evening, was a resolution that had little to offer to the Palestinian people. The resolution would not encourage further Israeli withdrawal, American understanding or, for that matter, Arab support. The only party that stood to make gains from the resolution, most commentators agreed, was Jordan's King Abdullah who had once again projected himself to the West a model of moderation in the Arab world. The spat conspicuously failed to impress the Palestinian delegation. "As usual our Arab brothers have made more gains out of talking about the Palestinian cause than the Palestinians themselves. They talk about the Palestinian cause either to score points with the West or with their own publics. But little is done for the millions of Palestinians living under occupation," said one Palestinian delegate. "This has always been the case. And this is why we have become convinced that it is only the Palestinians who will be able to secure their own independence and statehood."
