The Sharm El-Sheikh summit aimed for a realistic political settlement, says Emad Gad The Sharm El-Sheikh summit stirred up a sharp debate in Israeli society between supporters and opponents. While the former saw the summit as a first step towards a real political settlement that would lead to a comprehensive peace in the region, opponents saw it as the prelude to major Israeli concessions that would be used by Palestinian activist forces to extract further concessions. In the midst of the controversy, extremist right-wing Israeli groups threatened to assassinate Ariel Sharon, while Palestinian sources also noted the possibility that Abu Mazen might be assassinated. Despite the polarisation in Israeli society during the summit, moderate Israelis spoke clearly about how the summit was simply a starting point. They noted that the summit is the first Palestinian-Israeli meeting to aim for a realistic political settlement, far-removed from an ideology that only recognises eternal rights. This was quite clear in an article written by Yair Lapid, entitled "Without yarmulkes and kuffiyas", published in Yediot Aharonot on 9 February, the day after the summit. "Yesterday, four secular leaders arrived in Sharm El-Sheikh," Lapid wrote. "It was a summit without yarmulkes or kuffiyas, its language that of secularism. "'Extremists on both sides want to close the window of opportunity and leave both peoples to drown in blood,' Sharon said. He added, 'we must all declare that violence will not win.' "The three leaders with him understood what he was talking about. President Mubarak, whose continued grip on power depends on his ability to stifle the Muslim Brothers, understood it. So did King Abdullah, in whose country Al-Qaeda extremists tried this year to execute an attack only a short distance from his palace. Perhaps Abu Mazen, carrying the truce like an amulet, was the one who understood Sharon's words the most. "These old warriors know that the coming war will take place in their own countries, against people who claim that they are following divine orders. They met in Sharm El-Sheikh to try to reach an agreement that would enable them to manage this war without always being forced to look behind them. Faced with the so-called unholy alliance between our right-wing extremists and Islamist extremists, the leaders will try to create their own alliance, whose strength lies in the fact that none of them aspires to sainthood. Perhaps it is because of this that the public -- both Israeli and Palestinian -- have recently expressed their willingness to give the leaders a chance. Because this time, none of them aspire to speak in the name of history. No one is wiping away tears, and all the handshakes were quick and down-to-business. Sharon even refrained from the Biblical verses he is so fond of quoting, substituting this sentence: 'Together we will put an obstacle before the transitory forces.' Everyone knew what he was talking about -- all of them, including the last religious leader with a connection to the Middle East conflict, US President George Bush." On the other hand, Yehuda Litani clearly warned of heightened Palestinian expectations in an article entitled, "The spiral of bloodshed is only on vacation", published in Yediot Aharonot on 10 February. "We've learned not to get too excited about any sort of summit meetings, or any statements about 'a window of opportunity', 'the end of violence', and 'the wheel of peace has begun to roll'. We've been disappointed by similar statements issued in the past from Sharm El-Sheikh, Madrid, Camp David, and the White House. Our rosy hopes have been dashed before our eyes by the attacks with their many victims, the firing of missiles and aerial bombings. For four and a half years, more than 4,500 people on both sides have been killed in the Intifada, which was declared over in Sharm El-Sheikh. "The issue of the release of prisoners, for example, can break the current relative calm within a very short time. Palestinian organisations can fan the flames again if an agreement is not reached that they can accept. (We must also consider the families of terrorist victims, who are strongly opposed to the release of those who killed their loved ones.) But even if the two sides can overcome these preliminary obstacles, the withdrawal from Gaza and the northern West Bank will be dependent on the agreement of both sides from now on. At the current stage, there is nothing to guarantee the success of this plan, behind which Sharon is putting all his weight. Senior officers in the army and the police, who are preparing for the evacuation, fear a wave of violence will sweep the country when disengagement begins. "Only after disengagement is implemented do the real problems begin. If security calm can be maintained until that time, Israel is supposed to turn over 50 per cent of the West Bank to the Palestinians. The 'independent Palestinian state' will be composed of enclaves in the West Bank connected by border crossings and the Gaza Strip, completely isolated and surrounded by an Israeli fence on all sides. The enclaves in Mt Hebron, Bethlehem, Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin and Tulkram will also be surrounded by fences, and the security fence near the Green Line will continue to be a point of disagreement between the two sides. "These enclaves, without any tangible link between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, are supposed to be an appropriate response to Palestinian aspirations for an independent state. Although Abu Mazen is now talking about all the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, he will be forced to make do with less than that -- much less. Sharon -- considered by the settlers and their partisans to be a traitor today -- still hopes to keep the lion's share of the West Bank settlements. What will be left in Palestinian hands will not be a state or even a statelet, but merely a few plots of land, all that is left for them after decades of land confiscation for the purpose of building settlements. "Thus, what is left after the Sharm El-Sheikh summit is not a window of opportunity, but a temporary truce. Although Abu Mazen's efforts went a long way to achieving this truce, the contribution of the Palestinian weakness and impotence was even greater. Even without the efforts of the Palestinian president, the Intifada would have died down. If the ceasefire is not violated because of disagreements over the release of prisoners or the borders of Palestinian enclaves in the West Bank, it will be broken by the sense of humiliation of living inside crowded ghettoes surrounded by Israeli settlements." To read more articles from the Israeli press, please visit the website of Arabs Against Discrimination www.aad-online.org.
