EuropaWorld 9/11/2001 Present Attitudes and Historical Perspectives

World attention is again focused on the Middle East Peace Process. In this article Dr Gabriel Patrich, a writer on Middle East Affairs, gives an Israeli perspective and says that poll information suggests that peace is indeed possible although important changes in the attitudes of the Palestinian leadership towards Israel are a pre-requisite.

Yasser Arafat lost his big chance of giving his people their own State, when he walked out refusing, in Camp David, then Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Barak generous offer of Palestinian statehood, turning over most of the West Bank and Gaza to him and giving the Palestinians control over parts of East Jerusalem.

Yet despite the overall pessimistic outlook, there is a surprisingly small impact of the year long Intifada on Palestinians' and Israelis' sentiments towards reconciliation given a state of peace and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Under such conditions, 73% of the Palestinians and 73% of the Israelis would support a process of reconciliation despite the ongoing hostilities.

But is Arafat sincere when he talks of peace with the western world or is his final task the destruction of the state of Israel? The chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) once declared Jerusalem his home town: "This is my city ... This is where I was born." But he was not born in Jerusalem, nor even - as some of his comrades claimed - in the Khan Younis refugee camp in Gaza, but in Cairo in 1929.

There are substantial reasons to believe that Arafat himself does not want peace. His solemn promises to crack down on terrorism have been broken time after time. His promise to amend the PLO charter -- which calls for Israel's destruction -- has been endlessly delayed. He makes speeches in Arabic calling for never-ending 'jihad' or holy war against Israelis and Jews, and he proclaims in those speeches that the 'peace process' is merely another stage in the decades-long struggle to liberate Palestine (meaning all of Israel). Look at every map that hangs in the offices of the PLO and you will see no Israel.

Israel is giving back land that was only occupied after its neighbours attacked it. This has happened five times since Israel's creation on May 14 1948. If the Arab nations had succeeded, there would be no Israel today. Something that the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular should keep in mind is: do not start a war if you are not willing to pay the consequences of losing it. Which brings us to the question: could the Palestinians be suffering the actions of their own people? In September 1970, King Hussein of Jordan led a merciless campaign to drive the Palestinian fighters from Jordan once and for all. This war was so ruthless (at least 5,000 Palestinians lost their lives), that it led to the birth of the infamous Black September terrorist group.

After their expulsion from Jordan, the Palestinians regrouped in Southern Lebanon, in an area, which became known as Fatah Land. This area was used as a base for a long line of terrorist attacks. Israel will never forget when in May 1974 - sixteen school children were murdered after terrorists held them hostage in the Netiv Meir School in Ma'alot.

Yasser Arafat has reportedly salted away billions of pounds for the Palestinian Liberation Organisation in secret foreign bank accounts and investments, including property in London. The disclosure about the hidden wealth of his PLO comes amid deepening economic hardship in his Gaza and West Bank fiefdoms and may prompt international donors, including the European Union countries, to ask why Mr. Arafat is still demanding aid for his Palestinian authority.

Arafat is making the same mistakes as the previous Arab leaders in the course of a century.
In 1939, the Palestinian Arab leaders rejected the British White Paper which advocated the creation of an Arab state in 78% of Palestine. Not only did they reject it, but their subsequent support for Hitler in the Second World War spurred British alienation, resulting in the UK's support for a less favourable partition plan in 1947. In that year the UN advocated the creation of two states with 70% of habitable Palestine allocated to the Arabs. Once again, the Palestinian leaders rejected the plan and then urged a war of elimination for which they were in all essentials unprepared. It resulted in flight, dispersion and loss of territory that is grieved until this day as their 'Nakba' or disaster.

In 1967, an Arab war, egged on by the newly formed PLO, resulted in one of the most devastating routs in world history, with Israeli conquests in the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai almost tripling the Jewish state's size. The Israelis, in what was possibly the most magnanimous gesture of any government since, then offered to return that territory for recognition, negotiation and peace. The Arab nations, meeting in Khartoum in August 1967, were unequivocal in their rejection. The three no`s (recognition, negotiation and peace in exchange for land) became the high water mark of Arab obduracy, dooming the region to further bloodshed.

Arafat's continued failure to rein in terror and his continue advocacy of violence has inexorably impelled the conflict to a point of no return. Having sided with terrorists and advocates of violence, he often appears to be knowingly plunging the Palestinian cause towards catastrophe.

The opinion poll, conducted in the summer of 2001 by the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research and the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, finds that both publics support their governments' decision to accept the Mitchell report which calls for a cease-fire and a freeze on settlements (50% of Palestinians and 68% of the Israelis), and a return to the negotiation table (63% of Palestinians and 66% of Israelis).

However, fifty percent of the Israelis oppose continuing the negotiations from where they stopped at Taba compared to only 33% of the Palestinians and 41 per cent of the Israelis and 46 per cent of the Palestinians believe that there is no chance to reach a peace agreement in the foreseeable future, compared to only 19 percent of the Israelis and 23 percent of the Palestinians who felt so immediately after the Camp David summit.

Similarly, 59 percent of the Palestinians and 46 percent of the Israelis characterise their relations five to ten years from now as conflictual and violent, compared to 31 percent of the Palestinians and 10 percent of the Israelis who felt so a year ago.

Despite support for the cease-fire, Palestinians' support for armed attacks continues to be strong.
92 per cent support armed attacks against Israeli soldiers in the West Bank and the Gaza strip, and 58 per cent support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel.

Israelis in turn, by and large support Sharon's policy so far to continue with moderate military measures in order to maintain the option for future negotiations (44%). 37 per cent of the Israelis however want to react in full force in order to remove Arafat from power and only 16 per cent support a unilateral cease-fire.

If peace were established however, 84 percent of Palestinians and 53 per cent of Israelis would support open borders with 60 per cent and 70 per cent respectively supporting joint economic institutions and ventures. 25% of the Palestinians and 45% of the Israelis would even support joint political institutions designed eventually to lead to a confederate system

On a personal level, under conditions of peace, 63 per cent of Israeli Jews would invite a Palestinian colleague to their home, and 51 per cent would be willing to visit a Palestinian colleague in his home. 28 per cent of Palestinians would visit an Israeli colleague.