WRITE for ATol ADVERTISE MEDIA KIT GET ATol BY EMAIL ABOUT ATol CONTACT US
Asia Time Online - Daily News
             
Asia Times Chinese
AT Chinese



    Middle East
     Jan 25, 2011


Leaks shake up Israeli-Palestinian balance
By Victor Kotsev

TEL AVIV - "Al-Jazeera has declared war on the Palestinians," a senior Palestinian Authority official proclaimed in front of Israeli daily The Jerusalem Post on Sunday. "This station serves the interests of the enemies of the Palestinians." He even raised the possibility that the Qatar-based news network might be banned from operating in the West Bank in the future.

These were some of the first comments that greeted al-Jazeera's reports on the so-called "Palestine Papers" [1]: about 1,600 confidential documents related to the past decade of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Among other revelations, in June 2008, Palestinian negotiators reportedly agreed in secret to let Israel annex almost all of East Jerusalem (excluding Har Homa

 

and the large nearby settlement of Ma'ale Adumim) and to settle with a "symbolic number" of Palestinian refugees from 1948 (according to The New York Times, 100,000 over a period of 10 years) returning to Israel as a fulfillment of the right of return.

The papers, many of which are expected to be published soon, dropped a bombshell on the Palestinian Authority and Israel. This is the first time such far-reaching Palestinian concessions have been revealed in public. By contrast, officially the Palestinian Authority has insisted on all areas with predominantly Jewish population beyond the Green Line (including French Hill, Pisgat Ze'ev, Neve Ya'akov, Ramat Shlomo and Gilo) and on the right of return of several million Palestinian refugees and their descendents to Israel (something that is unacceptable to the Israelis at it would threaten the Jewish character of their state).

The documents appear to be mostly records and transcripts from meetings between Israeli, Palestinian and American officials, put together by the Palestinian negotiation support unit. According to British newspaper the Guardian, which shared the exclusive access to the papers and compiled its own series on them, [2] "[They] were leaked over a period of months from several sources to al-Jazeera. The bulk of them have been independently authenticated for the Guardian by former participants in the talks and by diplomatic and intelligence sources."

The precise consequences of the leak are hard to gauge yet, but the Palestinian Authority (PA) will take a blow - at least in the eyes of the proverbial Palestinian street. According to Palestinian news agency Maan, "[Hamas strongman in Gaza] Muhammad Zahhar said PA officials should be ashamed of themselves, and should hide themselves from the Palestinian public."

In their first reactions, PA leaders sought to downplay and deny the reports. "This is a theater," chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat (who features prominently in the leaks) said. "This is part of a campaign targeting President Mahmoud Abbas and the PA at a time when we are going to the UN Security Council regarding the settlements." He claimed that Abbas had rejected territorial concessions in Jerusalem, and affirmed the official line. "East Jerusalem is the capital of the Palestinian state," Erekat announced. "All of east Jerusalem."

However, while it is likely that the release will hamper the Palestinian efforts to mount an efficient offensive against Israeli settlement construction at the Security Council, it is short-sighted to brand it a victory for Israel. For the Jewish state, it will mean increased international pressure, at a time when its isolation is growing and its diplomats find themselves increasingly on the defensive. A major claim that Israeli leaders have used to reject concessions to the Palestinians is that "there is no peace partner". If anything, the leaks suggest exactly the opposite.

Domestic pressure would also mount, as the Israeli left is currently trying to reorganize itself, and may attempt to use this issue as a rallying point. Whereas Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government is not implicated in some of the most dramatic revelations, it will have to participate in the soul-searching that will almost certainly ensue when many Israelis ask themselves: if we were offered so much, how could we refuse?

It is hard to swallow, in particular, the response of opposition leader Tzipi Livni, then-foreign minister, to Erekat's unprecedented offer: "We do not like this suggestion because it does not meet our demands [for additional territories] .. and probably it was not easy for you to think about it, but I really appreciate it." The apparently fake expression of care adds insult to injury.

There are certainly mitigating circumstances: at the time Erekat made the offer, the government of which Livni was a part was nearing the end of its term, the Palestinian negotiators would have had a hard time selling the concessions to their people, and the possibility then an agreement could actually be implemented seemed remote. In fact, it is possible that when he made the offer, Erekat was counting exactly on that, and was quite simply bluffing. Still, if the latter is true, the Palestinian negotiator made a brilliant bluff, and it will be very hard for the Israeli government to avoid the bad publicity resulting from this exchange.

Netanyahu, moreover, may be personally accountable. According to a report by Israeli journalist Carlo Strenger, the current Israeli government refused to even open a recent Palestinian offer. [3] The Palestinian Authority may use all this to try to mitigate the domestic impact of the release: it could claim - or insinuate - that the offers were a bluff. If Israel suffers an embarrassment, and the PA can show that the Palestinian people ultimately benefited, their case would be strengthened.

The irony would be that if this happens, the Palestinian leaders would have to maintain a characteristic double-speak, claiming for domestic audiences that they were bluffing all along while keeping a straight face in front of the international community. But in Middle-Eastern negotiations, this is nothing new.

This is also the context for the recent debates in the Israeli government whether to seek an interim agreement. [4] According to Israeli analyst Aluf Benn (notably writing before the al-Jazeera reports), "a provisional Palestinian state is Netanyahu's best bet [to counter international pressure]". Benn argues: "One option is to adopt the concept advanced by the Reut Institute, under which Israel would upgrade the PA's political status and recognize it as an independent state within its existing borders ... This concept is built into the second phase of the so-called 'Road Map', which called for the creation of a Palestinian state within provisional borders."

It is hard to determine who the sources of the leaks were, what the motivation behind was, and how they will impact the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. They could have come from a rogue Palestinian actor or group (this is consistent with using al-Jazeera and the Guardian), but they could also have been acquired and released by an external actor. As for the latter two questions, there are two distinct possibilities, which, on a closer look, are not mutually exclusive.

On the one hand, they could be (or become) part of the blame game following the collapsed negotiations. This would signal a true end for the current round of peace efforts - which even some committed peace activists have characterized as stillborn. On the other hand, however, the leaks could be (or serve as) a desperate attempt to kick-start the negotiations, by shaking up the status quo and forcing both sides to make decisions and take actions. They clearly demonstrate that the gaps are not as wide as previously thought, and bring into focus issues that are central to the conflict, yet so far were too embarrassing for both sides to openly talk about. 

If the initial shock is managed correctly, they could even prove invaluable to the peace efforts of the Barack Obama administration. At the very least, the revelations would throw both sides off-balance and impede their ability to deliver unpleasant surprises.

Notes
1. The Palestine Papers al-Jazeera, January 23, 2011.
2. The Palestine Papers The Guardian, January 23, 2011.
3. 4.Israel's first step to Mideast peace: Opening the door, Obama style Ha'aretz, January 21, 2011.
4. Netanyahu mulls interim agreement with Palestinians, , Ha'aretz, 24. January 2011.

Victor Kotsev is a journalist and political analyst based in Tel Aviv.

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)


A sliver of hope in the Middle East
(Jan 18, '11)

Israel-Palestine theater starts a new act (Jan 7, '11)|

 

 
 



All material on this website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd.
Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110