Bypassing Palestinians Won't Produce Peace for Israel

By Rachelle Marshall

In his essay "The Will to Believe," William James asks us to imagine a hiker lost in the mountains in the midst of a blinding snowstorm. If he stands still he is certain to freeze to death. If he moves forward he could fall over a cliff and be dashed to pieces. But with no other alternative he has to take that chance. "In all important transactions of life we have to take a leap in the dark," James writes. He adds, however, that if we are to reach the other side safely, we have to believe we can do it.

The PLO negotiators who signed the Declaration of Principles (DOP) with Israel in September 1993, and the Palestinian and Israeli peace activists who supported the agreement as the first step toward ending Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, were taking just such a leap in the dark. The Palestinians, like James' Alpine climber, were faced with only two choices: either to remain in a situation that was fast becoming unendurable or to take a step that involved great risks but might lead in the end to freedom and security.

Dangling Over the Abyss

A year later the Palestinians are still dangling over the abyss, and the will to believe on the part of peace supporters is beginning to weaken. Even as the Jerusalem Post was reporting, in early September, that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres were "engaged in a feverish catfight over next year's Nobel Peace Prize," it was clear that to Rabin, at least, a peace settlement that would satisfy even moderate Palestinians is out of the question.

According to some Middle East analysts, Rabin's aim all along has been to use a token agreement with the Palestinians to open Arab world markets to Israel, pave the way for peace with Syria and Jordan, and keep the money flowing from the U.S. Treasury. Meanwhile, Palestinians would get nominal control over no more than a portion of Gaza, where half the adults are unemployed and streets run with sewage; and an area around the city of Jericho so small that local inhabitants say you can start your car at one edge of it and reach the opposite border before shifting into third gear.

Although the DOP calls for extending Palestinian self-rule throughout the West Bank, the Israeli government has spent the past year obstructing the process and making sure that any Palestinian self-governing authority will face crippling obstacles.

Moderate Israelis and Palestinians cite evidence that Israel is actively undermining the agreement it signed last year. A front-page article in the strongly pro-Israel Northern California Jewish Bulletin of Sept. 9 describes with considerable sympathy Palestinian grievances against Israel. The report cites Israel's continued failure to inaugurate the "safe passage" arrangement called for by the DOP that would enable Palestinians to travel between Gaza and Jericho; and the fact that fewer than half of Palestinian security prisoners have been freed, with most of those released confined to Jericho. The reporter, Ira Friedman, declares bluntly that "the Palestinians were twice double crossed" by Israel's breakthrough with Jordan last July. Not only was Jordan promised a special role in final-status negotiations over Jerusalem, but Israel's agreement to allow Jordan to export up to $30 million worth of goods to the West Bank may violate the terms of the economic agreement reached last April between Israel and the PLO.

Despite the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, Friedman writes, "the lines to enter the Civil Administration offices in the West Bank, and the bureaucratic runaround once inside, are as long and infuriating as ever." He mentions Israel's initial refusal to allow Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto to enter Gaza as one of many incidents that have "re-enforced the feeling, so prevalent among Palestinians, that consideration and good manners still remain at a premium in their contacts with the Israelis—even in situations where they are on an equal footing."

As the Jewish Bulletin's report makes clear, the behavior of the Israeli government toward the Palestinians is anything but that of a peace-maker. This point was made more sharply by the Jerusalem Times, a moderate Palestinian weekly that supports the peace agreement. A Sept. 2 editorial points out that Israeli authorities are demolishing scores of Palestinian homes throughout the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem on the pretext that the owners lack permits—permits that the Israeli Civil Administration almost always refuses to grant. Meanwhile, the government continues to seize Palestinian land in the West Bank in order to expand Jewish settlements. The Housing Authority has announced it will shortly begin construction of 450 housing units near Ramallah. The editorial asks, "How can the Israeli government continue taking such atrocious measures against Palestinian residents at a time of supposedly building peace and implementing the peace accords? Does it want to leave more destruction behind, more opponents of peace with Israel, and more obstacles in front of the Palestinian National Authority?"

Apparently the answer is yes. The DOP leaves the Palestinians with the job of policing Gaza, with its shattered economy, at least 4,000 militant Jewish settlers, and—thanks to the Israelis who allowed thousands of guns to be smuggled in—a heavily armed Palestinian faction that opposes a compromise peace with Israel. On the West Bank, the Palestinians now are responsible for an educational system that is short of classrooms, teachers, books, and equipment. Thousands of Palestinian children are still suffering the effects of extended school closures, curfews, and other disruptions imposed by the occupation authorities. Some of the best Palestinian schools are located in East Jerusalem and hence no longer available to West Bank children because of border restrictions.

Palestinian authorities now have the power to collect taxes, but from a population impoverished by the border closings and massive layoffs from their jobs in Israel. As an added blow, the Israeli government is refusing to pay back the several billion shekels that Palestinian workers have paid in taxes over the years for social benefits they never received. With the need to provide facilities for education, health, sanitation, and other functions in an economy systematically crippled by Israel during 27 years of occupation, the Palestinians desperately need outside help.

Israel has not hesitated to use the Palestinians' financial crisis to exact political concessions. A year ago members of the World Bank promised to provide some $2.4 billion to help the Palestinian Authority take over its new functions, but so far less than $80 million has trickled in.

Even when the international donors do come through with more funds, the Palestinians will remain precariously dependent, not only on outside charity but on an Israeli government reluctant to see Palestinian self-government succeed. Israel has already replaced thousands of Palestinian workers with migrant laborers from abroad, and can close the borders at any time to Palestinians who still have jobs in Israel. Because Israel also retains control over water and land use in the occupied territories, Palestinians have only a limited opportunity to develop an independent economy. Meanwhile, Israel stands to profit from whatever development does take place. Last May 13 the Jerusalem Times reported that Palestinians living abroad who wished to return and set up new enterprises in Gaza and the West Bank have had to pay $100,000 to Israeli authorities for permission to do so.

But in any case, according to Israeli economist Esther Alexander, no substantial economic development can take place in the autonomous areas without a Palestinian currency, which Israel regards as a symbol of national independence and therefore adamantly opposes. As Dr. Alexander pointed out in an article originally published in Davar, there is a large reservoir of skilled but unemployed workers in Gaza and the West Bank, and an equally great need in those areas for new schools, hospitals, sewers, and other facilities. A local currency issued by the governing authority through a central bank would serve as a medium of exchange of labor and goods inside the Palestinian economy and allow these projects to go forward. Without such a currency, Dr. Alexander wrote, any hard currency that the Palestinians manage to obtain from abroad will have to be exchanged for shekels or dinars and therefore "all international aid which reaches the Palestinians will eventually go to swell the currency reserves of either Israel or Jordan."

Israel stands to profit from whatever development does take place.

In fact, the intention of some members of the Labor government, including Rabin, may be to keep much of the West Bank under Israeli control and give Jordan the dominant role in the so-called autonomous areas. Retired General Matti Peled, a longtime Israeli peace activist, recently observed in The Other Israel that the agreement reached in Washington last July between Rabin and Jordan's King Hussein was the first step toward such an arrangement. In Peled's view, Israel's tactics are designed to "bring Arafat to his knees [and force him to] consent to the inclusion of Jordan as a partner, and a senior one, in the remaining talks under the DOP."

But no matter how many roadblocks Israel sets up in the way of Palestinian independence, or how great the disparity of power between the two sides, Israel's efforts to achieve a secure peace without satisfying Palestinian demands for self-determination have little chance of succeeding. King Hussein and Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad are eager for peace with Israel, especially since it would mean improved relations with the U.S., but neither one is a totally free agent.

Hussein is answerable to a population that includes a substantial proportion of Palestinians eager to see the West Bank become free of occupation by either Israel or Jordan. Assad is an autocratic leader, but he would still find it difficult to convince Syrians to accept Rabin's offer of a "very slight" Israeli pullback from the Golan over the next three years in exchange for full peace. Israelis should also be aware that although Hussein and Assad are both willing to compromise for the sake of peace, neither leader is immortal. Their successors might be forced by public opinion—or their own inclinations—to repudiate any agreement with Israel that ignored Palestinian rights.

The same considerations hold true for the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat and Fatah currently enjoy greater popular support than Hamas, but as time passes and conditions in Gaza and areas of the West Bank become more desperate, Arafat's support could evaporate. Hamas, together with far more militant groups, would receive more than 36 percent of the vote in Gaza and the West Bank, according to a recent poll by the Center for Palestinian Research and Studies in Nablus.

It is also possible that if enough Palestinians become convinced there is no hope of peaceful change, no elected Palestinian authority will be able to impose order. The continued presence of heavily armed Israeli militants in the occupied territories would make the situation even more explosive, and once again both Israelis and Palestinians could find themselves embroiled in a cycle of violence and repression. It seems clear that in order for Israel to live in peace with its neighbors, protect its own citizens from random violence, and help bring stability to the Middle East, the Israeli government has no choice but to abandon its longstanding role as oppressor and recognize the Palestinians' right to a state of their own.

Palestinian leaders took a leap in the dark when they settled for limited control of Gaza and Jericho, with only a hope of future independence. But despite existing hostilities, the fates of Israelis and Palestinians in that tiny land are inextricably linked. If Israel tries to thwart the aspirations of the Palestinians by shutting them out of the peace process, both peoples could plunge into the abyss.

Rachelle Marshall is a free-lance editor living in Stanford, CA. A member of the International Jewish Peace Union, she writes frequently on the Middle East.