A bit unexpectedly, in
recent weeks the diplomatic initiative went over to the Palestinians. Every day,
attention is riveted to the latest developments at the bureau of Mahmoud Abbas
(Abu Mazen). Banner headlines in the morning tell of the newest initiative from
Ramallah. Towards noon, a chorus of angry reactions is heard from Netanyahu and
his ministers. In the evening, there come the rather confused reactions from
Washington and Bruxelles. Quite a surprise, after a long time in which the
Palestinians and their leaders were dragged into diplomatic pathways which were
defined for them by others.
Last year, Abu Mazen
entered with obvious reluctance negotiations with the Netanyahu Government. The
Palestinians had all the reasons in the world to assume that Netanyahu himself
does not want an agreement including withdrawal from the Occupied Territories.
And even had Netanyahu wanted it, he could not have gotten such an agreement
through his cabinet, with his extreme right coalition partners and his no less
extreme fellow members of the Likud Party. Knowing that Netanyahu wants nothing
but a show of talks and a 'peace process' leading nowhere, Abu Mazen was
pressured to enter negotiations under the threat that otherwise the
Palestinians would be denounced
worldwide as rejectionists.
Abu Mazen was required to
oblige himself not to go to the United Nations and not to take any unilateral
steps on the international arena, while Netanyahu was given the freedom to
continue unilateral settlement acts on the ground. Housing Minister Uri Ariel,
an incomparable expert in settlement construction, made the maximum use of this
opportunity.
The only sweetener given
for the Palestinians' bitter pill was the release of 104 prisoners - 104 out of
some 5000 in Israeli prisons, 104 held even before the Oslo Agreements, twenty
or even thirty years behind bars. This prisoner release was divided by
Netanyahu into four batches, each one accompanied by a massive propaganda
campaign in the Israeli media on "The release of Murderers" and a
demonstrative settlement building surge for "counter-balance".
For a few months, one
could cherish some hope that this process might nevertheless bear fruit. Not by
an agreement and understanding between Netanyahu's negotiators and those of Abu
Mazen - there never was the slightest chance of that. If there was any chance,
it would have been by forceful American mediation - putting a frame agreement
on the table, which the parties could not afford to refuse; directly
confronting Netanyahu, with the Europeans acting as the "bad cop",
making a credible threat of steps which might hurt the Israeli economy.
It is very possible that
these were always false hopes and illusions. That Secretary of State Kerry and
President Obama never seriously intended a head-on confrontation with Netanyahu
and his supporters in the American political system. Also that Catherine Ashton
and Merkel and Hollande and Cameron never seriously intended to play the role
which we attributed to them - of stern friends. Lacking that, there was left to
the "persistent" John Kerry only what seemed the path of least
resistance - to cut a deal with Netanyahu and bring it as "take it or
leave it" to the Palestinians.
According to leaks in the
Israeli media, the deal was supposed to be palatable to Netanyahu on quite a
few key points: clear-cut formulations about long-term Israeli presence in the
strategic Jordan Valley, and the demand for Palestinian recognition of Israel
as "a Jewish State", and conversely deliberately vague formulations
about the 1967 borders and the Palestinian capital in East-Jerusalem. This was
probably the dish which Kerry presented to Abu Mazen at their stormy meeting in
Paris - and the Palestinian President rejected it out of hand, and rejected it
again when it was warmed up again by President Obama in the White House.
Then, there was left the
Americans only the choice between declaring failure - and in that way handing
Netanyahu on a silver platter the victory in the "blame game" - or
trying at any price to buy more time and extend the negotiations beyond the
defined deadline of April 29.
Perhaps it would have
succeeded. Perhaps Abu Mazen would have agreed to extend the talks until the
end of the year, as Kerry asked - though in the Palestinian society there were
increasing calls for ending the farce. But Netanyahu's right-wing partners have
cut the Gordian knot when they intensively pressured the Prime Minister - forcing
him to cancel the fourth batch of prisoner release, scheduled for March 29. This
was a blatant violation of an explicit Israeli commitment, which eliminated the
only sweetener offered to the Palestinian bitter pill - and which released the Palestinians
from the suffocating siege of negotiations leading nowhere, providing them a
sudden gust of fresh air, the freedom to take their own initiatives.
First came the public and
demonstrative signature of the request for Palestinian adherence to fifteen
international organizations and treaties. Then the proposal to extend
negotiations beyond April 29 - but
provided that they be purposeful talks, aimed at determining the borders of Palestine-to-be,
and that settlement construction be completely frozen during talks. Then, the
threat to dissolve the PA and "hand over the keys" to Israel. And
finally - the agreement on reconciliation and ending the deep division among Palestinians,
separating Fatah from Hamas and the West Bank from the Gaza Strip. The Prime Minister’s
office in West Jerusalem and the State Department in Washington were confused
and disconcerted at the abundance of Palestinian initiatives landing on their
desks, and accused the intelligence people who had also been totally surprised by
the Palestinians moves.
“Do the Palestinians
themselves know what they want? Let them decide if they want to dismantle the
PA or to unite with Hamas" mocked Netanyahu. In fact, however, all these rapidly
interchanging initiatives carried a single message – to the Israelis, the
Americans, the Europeans, and the entire world. Over is the old game in which the
Palestinians were required to play a secondary role dictated to them, in the Procrustean
bed of ongoing occupation. From now on, the Palestinians are taking their fate
into their own hands and introduce initiatives to which others will have to react.
To his own Palestinian people, the
message of the initiatives emanating from Abbas' office is no less important : it
is possible to take the initiative and advance Palestinian interests - without
resorting to violence, such as deteriorated into a bloodbath following the
failure of Camp David fourteen years ago .
Can it succeed? What other
surprises have the Palestinian in store for Netanyahu and Kerry and Obama and
the other actors in this drama? One can think of at least one more step which
might materialize soon: a candidacy for the Palestinian presidency presented by
Marwan Barghouti - the most famous Palestinian prisoner, and the leader
considered as the having the greatest chance to succeed Abbas. He may well be
elected President in his prison cell - and on the day after, the Palestinian
security personnel would notify their Israeli counterparts: "For security
coordination between us, you have to apply to our President who is in your
jail."
