Winding the “Peace Process” Down, or Up

In Israel yesterday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that shuttle diplomacy, billions of dollars and billions of Euros, Tony Blair, three American generals, the Annapolis Conference, the Road Map and the Quartet were not enough to create a Palestinian-Israeli “peace.” She will blame countervailing forces: the Second Intifada, the election of Hamas, the Palestinian Civil War, the Lebanon War, the “Security Fence,” “humiliating” checkpoints, and the weakness of the Israeli government owing both to its failures in Lebanon and charges of corruption.

In Israel yesterday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that shuttle diplomacy, billions of dollars and billions of Euros, Tony Blair, three American generals, the Annapolis Conference, the Road Map and the Quartet were not enough to create a Palestinian-Israeli “peace.” She will blame countervailing forces: the Second Intifada, the election of Hamas, the Palestinian Civil War, the Lebanon War, the “Security Fence,” “humiliating” checkpoints, and the weakness of the Israeli government owing both to its failures in Lebanon and charges of corruption. She may privately note that the Bush, Olmert and Abu Mazen administrations are all lame ducks with miserable popularity ratings.

In fact, none of above account for the lack of “peace,” although several were either contributing factors or excuses behind which the parties could hide. The failure is owed entirely to the fact that “peace” is not a negotiable objective.

In UN Resolution 242, Israel agreed to “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict” in exchange for “termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” That is a pretty good statement of Israeli objectives – yes, there are Israelis with other ones, but Israeli government policy from left and right wing coalitions has clearly shown that Israel demands legitimacy and will withdraw.

There is no Palestinian leader willing or able to meet the prime condition of UN Res. 242. Yasser Arafat, the strongest of them, didn’t and didn’t want to. The idea that Hamas and/or Fatah will do it is ludicrous matter how much the United States browbeats Israel or tries to pay off the Palestinians.

Peace ultimately will be result of the Arab states accepting the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty – precisely what they declined to do in 1947 and declined to do in 1967, and most continue to do until now. No Palestinian leadership can afford to accept Israel as long as Saudi Arabia maintains its state of war with it and Iran funds Hamas.

So, as another American administration prepares to hand over the “Israeli-Palestinian problem,” we have a few modest suggestions for President-elect Obama: abandon the “peace process” – stop trying to create Palestine; focus on the regional security threats that are more likely to damage American, Arab and Israeli security interests – focus on Iran.

Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States agree that Iranian pursuit of nuclear capability is the most severe and immediate threat to regional stability. Use that to build a regional security architecture that will involve acceptance of Israel’s legitimacy and legitimate security requirements.

After that, ask the Palestinians if they want to get in on the deal.