Arab and Palestinian positions at the World Economic Forum reflect a new realism and responsibility, writes Ibrahim Nafie International concern over the Middle East conflict lent a sharp political edge to this year's World Economic Forum, held in Jordan from 21 to 23 June. Such projects as the construction of the so-called "peace conduit", a canal to bring seawater from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea were temporarily shelved with the tacit approval of all. Cooperative endeavours, particularly of this scale and between the specific parties involved -- Jordan, Palestine and Israel -- cannot be accomplished without appropriate political cover which, in this case, means progress on the roadmap intended to lead to the creation of an independent Palestinian state by 2005. The interval between the Sharm El-Sheikh and Aqaba summits and the WEF meeting saw an intensive drive to set the roadmap in motion. At this stage attention focussed primarily on the efforts of Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) to reach an agreement with the Palestinian factions over a truce in keeping with his government's commitment to halt all forms of armed resistance. Unfortunately Abu Mazen's efforts ran up against two formidable obstacles: the rejection by certain Palestinian factions of the notion of a truce and the Israeli government's determination to undermine his efforts through the sustained pursuit of its assassination policy, which recently targeted Hamas leaders Abdul-Aziz Al-Rantisi and Abdullah Al- Qawasmeh. Abu Mazen was not in an enviable position, caught between accusations from Palestinians that he is selling out and pressures from Israel intended to propel him into armed confrontation with the Palestinian resistance factions by insisting that he disarm and dismantle their organisations. Whereas Abu Mazen maintained that his commitment to halt violence could best be met through the notion of a truce, Israel objected that this would leave the initiative with the Palestinian resistance which, it held, would still be in a position to resume their activities. As pressure mounted from all sides the Palestinian prime minister decided to tender his resignation, leaving the reins of government to whoever was willing to assume the onus of leading the Palestinian people into new bloodbaths, either through another round of spiralling violence with Israel or through a Palestinian civil war triggered by a drive to disarm the factions. At this point Egypt dispatched the head of intelligence, General Omar Suleiman, who succeeded in persuading Abu Mazen to change his mind. Immediately afterwards a high-level Egyptian delegation went to Palestine to hold talks with the Palestinian factions in the hope of giving fresh impetus to Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue over a truce. Simultaneously, Egyptian diplomacy succeeded in persuading Israel to exercise self- restraint in the wake of the recent suicide bombing in West Jerusalem. If the experience during the interval preceding the WEF tells us anything it is that Israel's excesses must be kept in check. Palestinian and Arab confidence in the Sharon government is virtually non-existent, and with good reason. That this government is incapable of honouring its pledges is borne out by the report in Yediot Ahranot last Monday on Sharon's weekly cabinet meeting of the previous day. When Infrastructure Minister Yosef Paritzky suggested that Jewish settlers be relocated to Galilee in the north and the Negev in the south his proposal was shouted down by several cabinet members who, in turn, maintained that the government should issue an official statement encouraging the expansion of what they called "legal" settlements. Sharon then stepped in to say: "We can build in the settlements but we must not do that publicly. We shouldn't cause a stir every time we issue construction permits to the settlers. Let them build, but without talking about it." Such slipperiness makes it all the more imperative for the Quartet, and specifically Washington, to send an unequivocal message to Sharon, telling him to stop impeding Abu Mazen's efforts to restore calm and to start taking constructive confidence-building measures towards the Palestinian people. The WEF meeting presented a major opportunity to examine ways to surmount obstacles to implementing the roadmap. Not only were the timing and the place right -- Al- Shona on the Dead Sea has obvious significance with regard to the need for a solution to the Middle East conflict -- but also all parties concerned with the peace process were there. The foreign ministers of the US and Russia, the UN secretary-general and the EU's senior foreign policy official were present to represent the members of the Quartet which drew up the roadmap. Also on hand were the prime ministers of Israel and several Arab countries, notably Egypt and Jordan. The many collective and bilateral meetings these participants held on the fringes of the forum constituted an important step towards promoting the effective implementation of the roadmap. Indicative of the attention Washington is devoting to this end was US Secretary of State Colin Powell's statements in which he reaffirmed the commitment of his country to the full implementation of the roadmap. He said that Washington was committed to working towards "a permanent peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, ending the Israeli occupation and leading to the creation of an independent Palestinian state". More significantly, Powell expressed his sorrow over the Israeli assassination of Hamas military leader Abdullah Al-Qawasmeh. "I am sorry that that happened," he said. "I am sorry to find ourselves mired again in that tit-for-tat violence." Washington has also announced that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to visit the region at the beginning of next week as part of the drive to promote the implementation of the roadmap. However, it was the statement issued by Kofi Annan in the name of the Quartet, following a meeting of its members on the fringes of the forum, that struck the core problem. The Quartet committee "expresses its deep concern over the Israeli military operations that led to the death of innocent Palestinians and other civilians," he said, adding that "such acts do not strengthen security and are detrimental to trust and the horizons of cooperation." In response to Israeli claims that the Palestinian government was not doing enough to fight "terrorist organisations", the UN secretary-general said: "The Palestinians cannot fight terrorism and end violence without Israel's effective cooperation. Israel must do everything in its power to support the Palestinian government and take immediate measures to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people. If the Palestinians do not begin to feel some positive change in their daily lives, including the restoration of their freedom of movement, a freeze to settlement construction and the resumption of economic activity, I fear that there will not be sufficient public support to back a permanent peace." Annan's criticisms stirred angry reactions from Israel, which took the occasion to remind the members of the Quartet, "and the Europeans in particular", that terrorism claimed innocent victims on the Israeli side. The vehemence of the Israeli response betrays Tel Aviv's surprise at the tenor of the secretary- general's statement. With its obvious implication of the violence and humiliation the Israeli occupation metes out against the Palestinian people, it must have hit close to the bone. Although the WEF agenda included possible projects for regional cooperation between Israel and several Arab countries, the Egyptian position was clear: there can be no discussion of such projects until the peace process reaches its final stages on all tracks. As Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher put it before the forum began: "The current situation in the region does not permit for regional economic cooperation with Israel. Such cooperation requires an appropriate climate, which does not exist at present." Maher reiterated this position in his meeting with his Israeli counterpart Silvan Shalom. When the latter requested that the Egyptian ambassador return to Tel Aviv, Maher replied that that was difficult under current circumstances, adding that Israel must halt all actions that impede the implementation of the roadmap and Egypt's efforts to promote an agreement between the Palestinian government and opposition organisations over a truce. Still, the meetings that took place on the sidelines of the forum gave hope for progress in the implementation of the roadmap. Among the matters discussed was the completion of a draft agreement in accordance with which the Israelis would hand over to the Palestinians responsibility for security in Gaza and Bethlehem, as a preliminary phase before extending this process to other Palestinian cities. Also discussed were specific guarantees Washington could offer to the Palestinians and the Arabs with regard to restraining the activities of Israeli occupation forces. Perhaps the most pressing issue discussed was the creation of a body to steer and monitor the implementation of the roadmap. The importance of such a body cannot be understated. It was in large measure due to the absence of precisely such a mechanism that previous agreements between the Palestinians and Israelis ran aground, usually on the shoals of Israel's evasion of its responsibilities. In this context it might be useful to explore the idea proposed by French Foreign Minister de Villepan to send an international peace- keeping force to the region. If events in and on the sidelines of the WEF were constructive, that was in large measure due to the spirit of realism and responsibility reflected in the Palestinian and Arab position. It is in the name of this spirit that I reiterate the call to the Palestinian resistance organisations to join ranks with the government of Abu Mazen. By working together they will deprive the Sharon government of the opportunity to wriggle out of the roadmap and simultaneously ensure Arab and international backing for the measures discussed above, especially the proposal to send an international peace- keeping force to Palestine which will mark the tangible beginning to the liberation of its territory.
