Peace Talks

It was reported yesterday that Arab leaders agreed to move forward on Middle East peace talks over the objections of Libya and Syria. The agreement came in the face of continued Israeli expansion in Jerusalem. Said Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa "If we withdraw...what will be the Arab stance after that?" Indeed. There is little, if anything, Arabs can do about Israel. They cannot challenge Israel militarily and they have no economic leverage. World opinion matters little to Israel so long as they have support from the U.S. What choice do Arab leaders really have but to continue talking? Petulance has gotten them nowhere.

Even still, not all Arab leaders support the talks. Syrian President Bashar Assad pressured Palestinians not to enter in to peace talks with Israel. Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi threatened to withdraw Libyan support from the 2002 peace initiative agreed to by Arab leaders in Beirut. Despite protests to the talks, many Arabs support them, including Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The Palestinians have the most to lose from not talking. Many Arab leader across the region are taking significant political risks to pursue the talks. The question remains whether, and to what extent, Israel is willing to help them.

Provocative acts on the part of Israel, like the recent moves to expand Israeli settlements in Jerusalem, make it more difficult for Arab leaders to pursue peace talks. Many Arab leaders risk danger at home by alienating hard line elements to enter into talks with Israel. Israel should return the favor. If Palestinian President Abbas and the Arab League are willing to rebuff threats and stand up to hard line elements such as Hamas and Hezbollah, it is only fair that Israel take risks by standing up to hard line elements in their own community. Militant groups like Hezbollah and Hamas are obstacles to peace. So are Israeli settlers.

The Palestinians have been losing land, lives, property and dignity for a long time. It will not be enough for Israel to simply stop taking. They will need to start giving, and not just bits and pieces of land. They will need to give respect as well. Condescending to give up some small parcels of territory and limited control will do little to ease animosity toward Israel, especially since Israel retains control over the borders, restricts traffic and trade, and reserves the prerogative of entering those territories if and when it deems necessary. Stopping the expansion of settlements, reigning in settlers, and easing restrictions and control over Palestinian territory would make it easier for Arab leaders to sit down and talk with Israel. The fact that Israel often refuses to do so casts doubt on its willingness, and perhaps even its ability to negotiate in good faith.

If there is to be real peace, it will take more than for Israel to simply take its boot off the throats of the Palestinians. It will have to help them up and show them respect as well. It is in Israel's interest to assist Palestinians. A prosperous and vibrant Palestine would be an asset to Israel if for no other reason than such a Palestine would have much to lose in a conflict with Israel and much to gain by peace. If Israel is serious about peace and not simply seeking to end violence and crush resistance, they should make it worthwhile for the Palestinians. They should give the Palestinians enough for them to have hope. Not just for existence, but for prosperity and dignity. Only a prosperous and proud Palestine would have enough to lose for Palestinians to turn their backs on violence and embrace peace. If Israel insists on playing the role of suzerain, violence and protest will only continue.