Rather than argue the fate of the Arab peace initiative, the Arab order should focus on building its capacities, writes Abdallah El-Ashaal Since Israel's recent assault on Gaza, the Arab peace initiative, as approved at the 2002 Beirut summit, has come under public and official debate. Eventually, three points of view have taken shape. One is that the peace initiative should remain intact, as the Arab world is unwilling to consider the other option, which is war. To ditch the initiative, for many Arab officials, is to put the region at risk. The second view is Israel has rejected the hand the Arabs have extended, which means that it can only understand the language of force. To keep offering it peace is, therefore, a form of self-humiliation. For advocates of this view, the Arabs should stop debasing themselves and quit offering Israelis something they don't seem to appreciate. The third view, which has been adopted in the Kuwait economic summit and maintained in the Riyadh and Doha summits, is that the initiative should remain in place, but not forever. Some people suggested that we should specify a deadline for scrapping the initiative, but others objected. We should not be escalating matters when the Americans are trying to look into a possible solution, they said. Perhaps Washington will come up with a plan for a peace settlement covering various fronts of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the final months of 2008, and to this day, we've heard Arab countries, and the Arab League chief, bemoaning the death of the Arab initiative. Briefly, however, some interest in the initiative was revived when Israel showed a modicum of interest. But it then transpired that Israel wasn't interested after all. All Israel wanted was to get Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia, to normalise. And once Israel found that the Arabs were not keen on normalising, it lost interest altogether. Some Israelis seem to think that the Arabs will have to normalise their ties with Israel anyway, initiative or no initiative. There is much about the initiative, its history, and the reaction of major powers to it, that is worthy of mentioning here. For example, when the Arabs were discussing the initiative during the Beirut summit, President Bush got in touch with them and urged them to approve the initiative. This made many wonder if the initiative was in Israel's favour, for it wasn't customary for Bush to wish the Arabs well. When the 2002 Beirut summit approved the Saudi initiative, Washington incorporated it in the roadmap -- many would say to delude the Arabs into thinking that the initiative would be implemented at the final phase of the roadmap. The first part of the roadmap, however, called for the destruction of the resistance. The main aim of the roadmap, which the Palestinian Authority still clings to, is to stamp out resistance. But once this is done, Israel would have no motive to implement the rest of the roadmap. In other words, the whole roadmap, one can argue, is but a gimmick. The roadmap, you may recall, is not about simultaneous measures, but about a succession of steps, the first step being to liquidate the Palestinian resistance. To go back to the Arab initiative, it managed to survive with little reference to Israeli politics. In fact, the initiative was turned into a tool of inter-Arab bickering. People were being categorised according to their stand on the initiative. Supporters of the initiative didn't think too much of its opponents, and vice versa. The all too important question of what was actually better for the Arabs was conveniently forgotten. Those who defended the initiative were accused of selling out the cause and capitulating to Israel, whereas those who opposed it prided themselves in being the firebrands of anti-Zionism. So perhaps it is time to see the initiative in a neutral light. Some people want the scrapping of the initiative to be a slap on the face of the Netanyahu government. But how exactly is that move going to change Israeli policy? Also, when you scrap a peace initiative, does this mean that you're calling for war? I would like the initiative to remain in place, simply as a lasting expression of our desire for a just and overall peace -- no deadlines attached. The initiative is our final word, and we should stick to it. But for the initiative to be useful, the Arabs have to build up the bargaining chips needed for peace. Israel will never agree to peace unless the Arabs have power, especially militarily. The time when Israel's army was invincible is over, and Israel must know that the Arabs are not going to be pushed around forever. Meanwhile, Arab countries should review their relations with major powers. What we should demand from our friends is support for peace, not just lip service and empty rhetoric about our rights. We want our land back -- in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine. We want the Palestinians to regain their rights. And we want Israel's aggression ended. For this to happen, we have to find a way of becoming as powerful as the Israelis.
