Friday, Dec. 5, 2003 | 9:39 a.m.
THE VACUUM CREATED by the absence of a U.S. presence in the Middle East peace process has created several bits of sideline action. For example, this week a large group of Palestinians and Israelis have gathered in Geneva to discuss plans for peace in their homes.
Among them is Amram Mitzna, who lost by a landslide in Israel's last election. Also present is Yossi Beilin, who at one time was justice minister for Israel. Joining them is an assortment of Palestinians like Yasir Abed Rabbo, a former information minister. Actor Richard Dreyfus was the master of ceremonies for the conference opening.
If you know any of the above self-appointed individuals you are already yawning. But wait, because of frustration on the part of many people over the lack of action, others have supported the 50-page document the conference participants want called the "Geneva Accord." You wouldn't be surprised to see former President Jimmy Carter at the conference because of his continuing interest in Middle East peace.
The New York Times reports that, "Nelson Mandela, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and former president of South Africa, made a virtual appearance in a videotape shown on a vast screen. Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, President Jacques Chirac of France, King Mohammed VI of Morocco, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and former President Bill Clinton, among others sent messages of support that were read aloud. Fifty-eight former world leaders have also signed a statement of support."
What surprised many international observers was our own Secretary of State Colin Powell planning to meet with the conference participants. Has he thrown in the towel and given up on a meaningful peace settlement between the official and elected leaders of the Israelis and Palestinians?
Eric Fettmann, a critic of the conference, writes in the New York Post: "Indeed, the Geneva document is more than a rehash of the failed Oslo Accords, of which Beilin was a chief architect. Under Oslo, difficult issues like Jerusalem were put off until the very end, in expectation that, having come so far, the two sides would have to reach agreement.
"Geneva addresses the issues that Oslo left unresolved. But it instead refuses to seriously address a key issue on which even Oslo offered specifics: Terrorism.
"Yes, it calls for an end to terror. But it neither defines terrorism -- the Palestinians consider suicide bombings 'legitimate resistance' -- nor does it spell out how it should be ended. Most importantly, ending terrorism is not deemed a prerequisite for any final agreement."
The document presented in Geneva won't survive in the real world. The most the participants can hope for is that it will encourage the real leaders to restart the peace process. There's no doubt that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis want peace, but not at any price. Yasser Arafat likes the document because he sees it as a victory won by his directed terrorism. We also have to believe that he sees it as only a first step that will help him demand even more concessions from Israel. Arafat is an old fox who knows how to use terrorism and every other weapon to stay on the world stage.
Here at home one of my favorite Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. John Kerry, has also drawn his own blood when saying he would appoint a special envoy to the Middle East. He went on to name Clinton, Carter, former President George Herbert Walker Bush and his secretary of state, James A. Baker III. Somebody should remind Kerry that Baker is the man who went to Syria to criticize Israel, and Carter certainly isn't viewed in Jerusalem as a friend of Israel.
Peace in the Middle East is a complex problem with no simple solution. We must hope that Powell and other Americans have learned that until terrorism ends there will be no peace.
archive
