Neither Side Can Have It All

A reflection by Mr. Donald Kruze

During my recent trip to Jerusalem, I was struck by the comments of both Israelis and Palestinians to the effect that a Palestinian state is inevitable the only questions are when and how much power and how much land it will have. To the fervent American born Israeli settler in Efrat, the acknowledgment of the inevitability of the Palestinian State was implicit recognition that Israel cannot have it all just as Mr. Arafat's signing of the Oslo Agreement in 1993 had been the Palestinian acceptance of only a part of Palestine. This acceptance of the fact that the land must be shared by both peoples may seem to be a statement of the self-evident and therefore no big news. But it has taken 50 years for Israel and the Palestinians to get to this simple fundamental point of mutual recognition of each other's existence and of the fact that the other side was not going to go away.

Of course, the recognition of this fact that neither side can have it all is only the beginning of the process which lies ahead "the final status" negotiations which promise to be uniquely difficult. The negotiation topics will be the status of Israeli settlements, the borders of Israeli territory, the nature and powers of the Palestinian authority, refugees, and that most controversial of all, the status of Jerusalem. Given the great disparity in power between Israel and the Palestinians, many fear that these negotiations will not lead to a mutually acceptable outcome but rather to an impasse and total breakdown in the peace process. In other words, Palestinians told me that Israel, the Middle East super power, may not we willing to make to the weak and disorganized Palestinians the necessary concessions which would satisfy even minimal Palestinian requirements. If such a negotiation failure should occur, Palestinians do not see the US as being willing to put sufficient pressure on Israel to do what the international community would expect that Israel should do.

It was surprising to sense that both sides did not expect the 1999 Israeli elections to lead to a clear result vis-à-vis the peace process. Many Palestinians said that it really did not matter who won Likud or Labor because "all Israeli governments are the same -- they want to dominate Palestinians." Some Palestinians even saw virtue in keeping Netanyahu in power because he is so distrusted and disliked by the world at large and specifically by the American administration. The thought being that Arafat and the Palestinians would continue to get favorable notice in the White House as compared to the untrustworthy Netanyahu. On their hand, Israelis seemed to think that whoever won the election would have to concede things to the Palestinians far beyond what their campaign rhetoric had indicated. Thus, many Israelis saw nothing but hypocrisy in the words of the candidates. In the meantime, as we traveled around the West Bank it was clear that the Netanyahu government was doing all it could in its last remaining months before elections to squeeze Palestinian life. It had refused to honor its Oslo commitments, refused to negotiate seriously as expected by Oslo, engaged in feverish settlement and infrastructure building, continued closure of Jerusalem and Israel to virtually all Palestinians, continued lifting of Jerusalem ID cards from many Palestinians living in Jerusalem, and refusal to give building permits to Jerusalem Palestinians.

In short, the Israeli government of Mr. Netanyahu seemed to be doing whatever it could get away with to de-Arabize Jerusalem and to discourage Palestinians from being able to look forward to a somewhat normal life for themselves and their children. I was aware of the growing disappointment many Palestinians felt regarding the governing style and practice of Yassir Arafat. This was confirmed to me in a conversation with a well respected Palestinian academic who spent more time outlining the mistakes and sins of the Palestinian authorities than he did about Israel's continuing abuses. It seemed to me that, in his mind, this man was more concerned about the future and was planning for the Palestinian State to be and trying to shape it in the womb a secular multiparty democracy free to all people regardless of sex or religion. On the Israeli side, many thoughtful Israelis also were more looking to the future and preoccupied with Israel's internal dissension and the battles between secular and religious Jews than they were about external threats. The Palestinian issue was clearly secondary in their thoughts. It is true however that this could change overnight if a terrorist bombing occurred.

As I thought back to my years in Jerusalem as American Consul from 1976 to 1980, I had to admit that however bleak the present scene is for Palestinians, there is no longer the doubt that somehow and sooner rather than later there would be a Palestinian state. Palestine is not a lost cause. That assurance was not present in 1980.

Our pilgrimage brought us to see the land and its people 5 million Jews and 4 million Arabs. We saw how precious the land is to both peoples. It represents identity for both. Jews, after centuries of Diaspora, returning to establish a homeland. Palestinians, after centuries of life on the land under foreign domination, are seeking freedom and self governance. As we talked to both peoples, we learned that only the extremists on both sides are unwilling to compromise and recognize the others' legitimacy.

Unfortunately, we also saw that one side still controls the other and has overwhelming military strength. Accordingly, it is Israel which must make the principal response to the Palestinians in the form of withdrawal from military occupation of Palestinian land. The Palestinians have already given their response: willingness to accept Israel within its 1948 borders or over 80% of Mandatory Palestine. May the new government of Israel realize that as the new millennium arises it is time for a new attitude towards the Palestinians and all of its Arab neighbors, an attitude more like the Yitzak Rabin of 1993 -- confident and ready to make peace with old enemies.