CAIRO: The Israeli press hailed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech earlier this month that peace was a “real possibility” in the Middle East. Arab leaders struck back, saying that because of the right-wing leader's comments and actions since taking over the helm of Israeli politics, peace was as “far from reality” as it has ever been. The question is, who is right? In Sunday's speech, Netanyahu set down the parameters for peace between his country and the Palestinians in an odd foreign policy speech that right-wing Israeli politicians usually do not deliver. In what some analysts say was a “monumental” speech, Bibi called for a Palestinian state, but demanded that it be demilitarized. Although not new to this ongoing dispute, the idea that a powerful Israeli nation would be next to, basically, a week Palestinian state, sums up the situation between the two sides: Israel equals strong, while Palestine must equal weak. Making matters worse for the region, Netanyahu demanded that nations recognize Israel as a Jewish state, highlighting the fact that in not so many years in the future, more non-Jews will be living in the current borders of the so-called Jewish state. This did not sit well in the Arab world. For a change, Arab leaders spoke out against the speech. Here in Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak – who has lost nearly all his credibility in his home country as well as abroad – lashed out at the Prime Minister, saying the speech “complicates matters” in the region. The old man added that “the proposal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state complicates the situation further,” the official Nile TV quoted Mubarak as saying. “The Middle East will be a scene of unrest if there is no comprehensive peace,” he said, adding “the solution to the major problems of the Arab and Islamic worlds is through Jerusalem.” But one subject that Arab and Palestinian leaders do not seem to understand is the emotional issue of “right of return.” Senior Fatah leader Ahmed Qurea' said Israel must recognize the right of return as stated in UN resolution 194. He added that settlements – which American President Barack Obama agreed – must be ended and Palestine must have East Jerusalem within a future Palestinian state. All fair arguments. However, the concept of “right of return” needs to be examined closer by Palestinian leaders. No longer can they continue to demand that their citizens be given a chance to return to their former homes, although this is a legitimate claim. Israel simply will not accept this in a peace deal. Therefore, Abbas or someone else needs to be honest to his people and tell them “we will demand adequate compensation for the homes we lost, but there will be no return. We will demand free movement, but you are not going to live in your former house.” Yeah, it is not ideal, but it is reality. If they can do this and the international community clamps down and delivers consequences to Israel for continuing to build illegal settlements, peace is possible. But, if the concept of returning to former homes lost in 1948 and 1967 are part of a peace deal, Palestine will continue to be a dream unfulfilled. In the end, only until Israel recognizes their faults and erring ways in the manner they have treated Palestinians over the past six decades will peace be possible. Former American President Jimmy Carter said that Palestinians were being treated as “animals” by their occupation overlords. Instead of great soundbites, Carter should push Israel to accept all its agreements and attack foreign politicians, such as Tony Blair, who continue to argue Hamas must accept all past agreements. For peace to prevail in this cyclical conflict, concessions must be made, but double standards need to be removed from the discourse. BM
