New peace talks in Middle East

THERE HAVE been plenty of false dawns

THERE HAVE been plenty of false dawns. Palestinians and Israelis have sat face to face, peace processes have been launched and new beginnings promised. Then the intractable forces of history have reasserted themselves with bloody inevitability. And now we are about to start again. Friday’s announcement that direct talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel, suspended in 2008 when Israel launched its operation in Gaza, will resume on September 2nd has to be welcomed, but with a healthy dose of scepticism.

The timing of the announcement has as much to do with giving the Obama administration a foreign policy success ahead of the mid-term elections as with any real signs that the parties are willing or able to do a deal.

“No one really thinks the peace talks will succeed. But this is how the world judges us, and so we have no choice but to go through with the dance,” a senior Israeli minister told the Wall Street Journal. Its frayed relationship with Washington is clearly the political imperative behind Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s willingness to dance. His commitment will be tested on September 26th when the government’s moratorium on expanding settlements expires. Will he be willing to face down coalition members by extending it on a de facto basis? Otherwise, the talks will collapse.

Mr Netanyahu also raised the bar on Sunday by suggesting the result would have to be a demilitarised Palestinian state committed to recognising Israel as a Jewish state. The former, reflecting a long standing Israeli concern about its security, should not prove insuperable given its willingness to accept an armed Palestinian Authority police. The latter, a recent demand from the PM, poses real difficulties for Palestinians, going well beyond the rightful insistence they should recognise the state of Israel, a demand still rejected by Hamas.

READ MORE

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton insisted on Friday the year-limited talks will deal with all the thorny “final-status issues” including a new state’s borders, security for Israel, the right of return for Palestinian refugees and control over Jerusalem. The aim is a final comprehensive settlement that would lead to the recognition by Israel of a Palestinian state within two years.

In truth the realistic outlines of a deal have been widely discussed for some time: a return to pre-1967 borders, with some adjustments through land swaps; security guarantees for Israel perhaps by means of a UN/EU peacekeeping force; a limited right of return for Palestinians abroad, but a financial compensation package; and a joint administration of Jerusalem. But the devil will be in the detail and elements of such a settlement are toxic to extremists on both sides. Laying the basis for the eventual sale of a deal will be as difficult as maintaining the momentum and even the fact of talks in the face of the inevitable provocations that both sides will litter its road with. But as Senator George Mitchell, US special representative in the region, recalls of the North’s peace process “we had about 700 days of failure and one day of success”.

The challenge is to press on for that prize.