http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-10/02/204l-100298-idx.html
Dealing By 'Creating Facts'
By Stephen S. Rosenfeld
Friday, October 2, 1998; Page A27
The Washington Post
The latest visits of the Israeli and
Palestinian leaders to the White House
represent a further collective effort to
resolve by negotiation and consensus the future
of the territories captured by Israel in 1967.
But there is, of course, another way to resolve
this crucial question. It is the way often
though not exclusively chosen by the Israelis
-- the way of capture, occupation and
imposition, of "creating facts" on the ground
by establishing and expanding Jewish
settlements.
So far, as a pro-Palestinian research
organization called the Foundation for Middle
East Peace accurately observes, international
diplomacy has largely failed to redress
Israel's transformation, by its settlements
policy, of the occupied territories. That
challenge is scheduled to be confronted in the
"permanent status" talks that are to follow the
interim negotiations the United States is
struggling to wrap up now.
Meanwhile, entirely at Israel's discretion,
settlement building goes on apace. The
foundation cited above figures that about
350,000 Israelis currently live across the
pre-1967 cease-fire line separating Israel from
the West Bank and Gaza; about half of them live
in annexed East Jerusalem. These settlements
enrage the spectrum of Palestinians, convince
them that Israelis are interested more in land
than peace and thereby dull the Palestinians'
incentive to satisfy Israel's other, reasonable
demands at either the interim or the
permanent-status stage.
These settlements come to be seen as facts, not
up for change. The more settlers move in and
the more deeply they put down roots, the harder
it will be to remove them and the higher the
price the Israelis will expect the Palestinians
to pay.
I bring up this disagreeable picture because
tension is now building over Yasser Arafat's
warning that, in the absence of satisfaction at
the bargaining table, he may unilaterally
declare an independent Palestinian state when
the five-year Oslo clock ticks down next May.
Procedurally and substantively, Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu said at Blair House this
week, a unilateral declaration is unacceptable.
He offered his own warning that such a
declaration would relieve Israel of its Oslo
obligations to the Palestinians.
Interesting, I said to Netanyahu. Since
unilateral action is unacceptable and since the
whole post-1967 Israeli settler movement was
and is unilateral, are you acknowledging that
the settlements are illegitimate?
No, said Netanyahu: The Oslo agreement put no
limits on Israeli settlements. Anyway, most
population growth in old settlements occurred
in the last, Labor government. And substantial
Arab construction that was either illegal or
against regulations also went on in the West
Bank.
I found it an unresponsive answer. Israel is
not without historical and religious claims,
not to speak of security claims, for its
interest in settlements. But none of these
claims can be fairly invoked and imposed
without due regard for Palestinian interests
and without direct consultation with
Palestinian authorities.
In short, if peace is the objective, none of
these claims should be asserted unilaterally,
from a position of military strength. Surely
Netanyahu understands perfectly the
inconsistency he is indulging in condemning
unilateral gestures when they serve Palestinian
interests and conducting a unilateralist policy
when it becomes an Israeli nation-building
tool.
Note Yasser Arafat's words in a June interview
with Die Welt: "Israel's security is contained
in the Oslo accords -- but not the security of
the settlers. We made peace with Israel within
the borders of 1967 -- and not with the
settlers. . . . [Settlements] are illegal. The
land on which the settlements were built was
stolen. The water is stolen. No one pays a
penny for it.
"Israelis find it completely all right to
confiscate the land of the Palestinians and to
occupy it. I cannot accept that. We agreed with
Israel in Oslo that we would find a joint
solution for the Israeli settlements. Israel
must live up to that; we are prepared to do so.
Foreign settlers are unacceptable in the long
term" (italics added).
There appears to be some bargaining space in
the Arafat statement. But does he have a
bargaining partner in Israel? Can Netanyahu
loosen his embrace of one-way unilateralism?
(c) Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company
