http://www.independent.co.uk/stories/C1905919.html
Does Mr Barak's Victory Really Change Anything?
By Robert Fisk, THE INDEPENDENT 5/19/1999
He has said he will not cede the Arab quarter of Jerusalem. So what hope for
Palestine?
In the dirt of the Sabra and Chatila Palestinian refugee camp and in Mar
Elias, they were not celebrating the election victory of Ehud Barak
yesterday. Over the entrance to Mar Elias camp with its open sewers and old,
worn water pipes running down the laneways, there hung an iron map of
Palestine: the original Palestine, Haifa as well as Ramallah, Tel Aviv as
well as Nablus, Jerusalem as well as Jericho, the whole shebang. And they
are not going to get it back.
They would like - the Palestinians who live among the garbage here - to have
the same "right of return" that Bill Clinton and Tony Blair have promised to
the Kosovo Albanians. But Mr Clinton and Mr Blair did not intend their
promise to apply to the Palestinians from Haifa and the rest of that part of
Palestine that became Israel in 1948.
"The differences between the Likud and Labour are minor," the spokesman for
the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine says. "Labour wants the
annexation of 52 per cent of the West Bank, Likud wanted 64 per cent - this
is the difference for the Palestinians."
True, Mr Barak wants peace. But everyone wants peace: the Palestinians and
the Israelis. Yet Mr Barak has said that he will not cede the Arab quarter
of Jerusalem to Palestine. So what hope for Palestine? The Arab world - the
supine, humiliated Arab dictatorships whose leaders have pleaded for
Washington's love and support and money - welcomed the Labour leader's
victory in the Israeli elections. Out came Egypt's familiar "hand of peace"
(and oh, if only President Hosni Mubarak would hold the same kind of free
elections which Israel conducts). "Egypt is ready to co-operate with the new
Israeli Prime Minister to revive the peace process and to change the general
atmosphere in the region which was extremely poisoned over the last three
years," the Egyptian Foreign Minister, Amr Moussa, said.
And from Jordan - whose Plucky Little King (Mark 2) prayed for Benjamin
Netanyahu's defeat - came equally familiar words. "Hopefully," the Deputy
Prime Minister, Ayman Majali said, "we will witness a serious move on the
peace process, on the Palestinian-Israeli track and on the Syrian-Israeli
and Lebanese tracks and hopefully we will witness a serious move for a
comprehensive, just and durable peace in the Middle East." But note the
double "hopefully" and the reference to a "just" peace. And the use of the
American phrase "tracks". For years, the Israelis have been trying to divide
the Arabs into these different tracks. The Palestinians fear Mr Barak will
do just the same.
Of course, Yasser Arafat joined in the applause. "I respect the choice of
this democratic election," he said without missing a heartbeat when he used
the word "democratic" - that quality which Arafat's Palestine so miserably
lacks. "I give my best wishes to Mr Barak." In the Gulf, many a sheikh will
be breathing a similar sigh of relief. Now that the awful Mr Netanyahu has
gone, they can deal with the nice Mr Barak. Just like that.
But history - especially Palestinian history - does not work like that. If
there is to be a Palestinian state - the only hope for a real peace - then
the Palestinians will have to have a capital in part of Jerusalem. They will
have to see an end to occupation, an end to the theft of Arab land and the
continued building of Jewish settlements on Arab land, an end to the
confiscation of Palestinian identity papers, an end to the demolition of
Arab homes. Mr Barak has promised none of this. Indeed, he may be more
interested in kicking to touch with a peace overture to Syria and Lebanon
rather than Palestine, leaving Mr Arafat to suffocate for a while longer in
his Gaza midden as the Palestinian leader's popularity sinks even lower.
And why not? Syria still demands, consistently, the return of the occupied
Golan Heights. President Assad had held out (in Syria's negotiations with
the Rabin-Peres Labour government) for a withdrawal of Israeli troops to the
borders of 4 June, 1967, a frontier which would give Damascus that part of
Golan which Arafat considers Palestine, the bit which is the source of water
- the Middle East's gold. Mr Rabin refused. Mr Barak may accept. So goodbye,
Mr Arafat would conclude, to another bit of Palestine.
Certainly, a peace with Syria would allow Israel to withdraw from the
cauldron of Lebanon - "unconditionally", according to UN Security council
Resolution 425, though Mr Barak may have other ideas - and save its soldiers
from the increasing attacks of Hizbollah guerrillas. Mr Barak has promised
to be out of Lebanon in a year. But on the ground things do not seem that
easy.
The Middle East has changed since Benjamin Netanyahu came to power in Israel
three years ago. President Mohamed Khatami of Iran - elected democratically
with a far more devastating popular vote than Mr Barak - has been meeting
King Fahd of Saudi Arabia after visiting President Assad in Damascus. For
Iran is no longer the pariah of the region.
The Iranians are now talking of a "strong regional alliance" between Tehran
and the Arab Gulf. And they have reason to do so. The Arab kings and emirs
are tired of America's crusade against Iraq and its sanctions-cull of Iraqi
children. They are weary of Washington's vacillation in the face of Israel's
refusal to abide by the American "peace process". They are distrustful of an
America which demands obedience to UN resolutions from Arabs but none from
Israel. Back, then, to that hovel in the Mar Elias refugee camp yesterday.
"The Labour government did not block settlements - it went on building
them," Mr Natour said. "They have a genius for prolonging the 'peace
process', to create new settlements, to 'Judaicise' Jerusalem, to create
facts on the ground. The Israelis like to play on differences of interest
between the Arabs."
Most of the Lebanese press took Mr Natour's view, warning readers that the
difference between Labour and Likud is not that great. "The wings of angels
will not sprout on the shoulders of Barak," the daily An Nahar warned.
"Claws already decorate the fingers of Barak."
Pessimism, of course, comes as easily to the Arabs as optimism comes to the
Israelis. But it's going to be a long haul. For the Middle East - and for
the United States of America - Barak is better than Netanyahu. But it is not
peace in our time.
