MIDDLE EAST: Deaglán de Breadún was impressed when he met two key envoys from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
If today's Middle East summit in Aqaba is as correctly polite and civil as the joint interview the Israeli and Palestinian envoys gave The Irish Times this week, then the future could yet contain some hope.
While there were deep differences between the Israeli Ambassador to Ireland, Mr Daniel Megiddo, and the Palestinian Delegate-General, Mr Ali Halimeh, they at least managed to express themselves in a calm and rational manner about the long and bitter conflict between their two peoples.
The climate surrounding the conflict has changed appreciably since the recent statement by the Israeli Prime Minister Mr Sharon that: "The idea of keeping 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation is the worst thing for Israel, for the Palestinians and also for the Israeli economy." I put it to Mr Megiddo that this was not the kind of language we were used to hearing from Mr Sharon's end of the political spectrum.
"True," the Israeli Ambassador replied, "but at the same time he realises that something has to be done. He very well knows, especially in regard to the Israeli economy, that we are suffering - both sides are suffering - in the past 32 months. The economy on both sides is in shambles. There is hardly any tourism: the whole tourist industry is as good as dead. That is only one aspect of it. But in order to revive the economy you obviously have to have a different situation, different conditions, meaning, going towards some kind of a settlement."
I put a similar question to Mr Halimeh because this, after all, was the same Ariel Sharon who was Defence Minister in 1982 when Israeli forces failed to prevent - some would say facilitated - the massacre of as many as 2,000 Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatila camps near Beirut.
Describing the Israeli Prime Minister as "a man which some of us find it difficult to trust", Mr Halimeh added: "It seems the pressure is coming from outside."
I asked him if he was surprised to hear Mr Sharon, of all people, describe Israel's presence in the West Bank and Gaza as an "occupation".
"I wish he had realised that a long time ago," Mr Halimeh said. "We could have saved the situation, we could have saved human lives and the destruction of the infrastructure of the Palestinian Authority and we could have saved civilians from both sides."
But he indicated that, if Mr Sharon meant what he said, the Palestinians would work with him to achieve peace. "We have seen and read in the past very positive statements from different political leaders in Israel in relation to the occupation and the number of the Palestinian people they have been controlling. What we are interested in is implementation, action. If Mr Sharon is really interested in settling this problem, we are as Palestinians very much prepared to engage him, talk to him, and put an end to this crisis."
I pointed out to Mr Megiddo that some people on the right of Israeli politics, e.g. settlers in the occupied territories, were still hoping Mr Sharon did not really mean what he said and was just providing soothing words to placate the Americans.
"As far as I understand Prime Minister Sharon," Mr Megiddo said, "he does mean it, otherwise the Government wouldn't have approved the Road Map. There are settlers who are on the more extreme side in Israeli society and they are voicing their opinions, but everything is a bit too early. We really have to see how things are going in Israel itself, how things will develop."
He understood that the new Palestinian Prime Minister, Mr Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, had given a commitment to eradicate terrorism, whatever it entailed.
"So the first step has to be eradication of terrorism so Israelis can live in security," Mr Megiddo said.
Speaking about Palestinian hopes for today's summit, Mr Halimeh said he hoped Mr Bush was genuine and that he had a plan. " I hope it's not a public relations exercise - that will be very disappointing for everybody. In the past he showed little interest, until he came to realise that the core of the problem in the Middle East is the Israeli-Palestinian ."
Pressed as to whether he believed Mr Bush was "for real" or just seeking to refurbish America's image in the region following the Iraqi war, he said:, "I wouldn't know." In the past, the Americans had "always let down the Palestinians". But he hoped this time for a US vision of "a Palestinian state, a serious Palestinian state that will be viable, with borders, with skies which we control, whose land will all be controlled by the Palestinians".
Meanwhile, Mr Megiddo said that while he hoped the summit would be a success, it should be remembered that President Clinton had dedicated very considerable time and energy to resolving the conflict and that "very generous offers" were made to the Palestinians which were not accepted.
"Other presidents, other secretaries of state, have been involved in the past as well, unfortunately without success until now, or reaching a certain stage and finally it broke down. So we do hope this first step will be a successful one, but a summit is only the beginning, then we have to see how things are going to be implemented on both sides," Mr Megiddo said.
Mr Halimeh did not agree with me that the "Road Map" aim of establishing a Palestinian state by 2005 seemed rather ambitious for such a lengthy conflict.
"Both sides, we know each other very well and we know each other's requirements," he said. "It is not very ambitious as far as I'm concerned. If both of us respond positively to the terms of reference of this agreement and genuinely commit ourselves to it, I think we will be able to overcome this crisis and by 2005 we will be able to say there is a Palestinian independent state and I see no reason why we should delay implementation."
The two envoys faced each other last week at a meeting organised by the Fianna Fáil Dublin Forum where the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Mr Tom Kitt, also spoke and urged the parties to emulate the British-Irish peace process which refused to be derailed by terrorist activities. However, Mr Megiddo believes "it is possible, unfortunately" that terrorist acts could halt the negotiations.
For his part, Mr Halimeh said the activities of Hamas and Islamic Jihad were "inhuman, immoral and cannot be justified".
But, he pointed out, "We have to differentiate between terrorism as an exercise which is being condemned universally and those who are fighting and struggling for their freedom and independence". Not all of those Palestinians who were fighting the Israelis were terrorists, he insisted.
Asked if the Palestinian leadership could bring Hamas and Islamic Jihad under control, he replied: "It needs collective efforts between us, the Israelis and the international community, and if we say otherwise we will be very naïve. The Israelis by themselves, even if they use the most sophisticated arms, won't be able to stop somebody who wishes to infiltrate any of the Israeli cities and kill him or herself. What we need, on the ground, is a political process to develop seriously in the right direction."
I put it to Mr Megiddo that, in order to launch a successful security crackdown on the hardliners, the Palestinian leadership needed political concessions. He replied that, for example, restrictions on Palestinians coming from the territories to work and do business in Israel had already been eased. But, he added, Hamas and Islamic Jihad were not the only terrorist groups. "There are other organisations as well which are quite close to the Palestinian Authority itself."
Obviously the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories will be one of the main stumbling-blocks in any set of negotiations. I pointed out to the Israeli envoy that the Palestinians and their supporters claim there are so many settlements now that a viable state is not feasible unless they are removed.
"As we have seen in the past you can't determine what the outcome of the negotiations will be," Mr Megiddo answered. "Everything will be discussed in the negotiations and we have to wait and see what the outcome of those negotiations [will be]."
He pointed out that, as part of the peace agreement with Egypt in the late 1970s, "Israel has dismantled in Northern Sinai all the settlements including the city of Yamit". Not only that, but Mr Sharon himself was in charge of dismantling those settlements.
When I suggested that such comments would get him into trouble with settlers back home, Mr Megiddo replied that they also "had that trouble" two decades ago, "but the settlers have been relocated and we are having a peace with Egypt".
Whatever their differences, one could not fail to be impressed during the course of this interview by the seriousness of both men.
While they were undoubtedly serious about their disagreements, they also seemed intent on trying to find a way out of the current turmoil which is causing such trauma on both sides.