A recipe for losing another peace chance

by Qaddoura Fares

RAMALLAH - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is not the only one who

wants his unilateral disengagement plan to succeed. Many on the Palestinian

side would like to see it work, certainly within the context of pulling the

Israeli troops out of Gaza and dismantling Jewish settlements. But the plan

as it stands today, and judging from what Israeli officials tell us, has no

chance of success.

The only component the plan has today is security. We, Palestinians, are

being told that the success of Sharon's plan can lead to a bilateral track

that would revive the peace process. But that is not enough to convince the

Palestinian people, the overwhelming majority of whom does not believe

peace is possible under the current government of Israel.

Moreover, it is not possible when Sharon himself and his adviser, Dov

Weisglass, speak openly that the plan was originally contemplated to freeze

the peace process and to bypass the public and international support the

Geneva Initiative initially gained after it was signed and officially

launched on December 1, 2003.For the unilateral disengagement to succeed it cannot continue only on the

leg of security; it needs a political component as well as an economic one.

Without the political component, there will hardly be a single Palestinian

prepared to give a hand to the Sharon plan, even when it speaks of pulling

Israeli troops out of the Gaza Strip. This political component is

fundamental to guarantee that the Gaza first process will not end up to be

Gaza last. The political component is the only mechanism that can serve as

a springboard for launching a comprehensive negotiations process that leads

to a genuine end to the conflict.

Many have asked what would be the alternative. Others argue that Sharon's

plan is the only game in town and that is why "we should deal with it

positively." This is true, but only to a certain extent. The only game in

town is and should always remain a negotiated settlement that puts an end

to this conflict. To move from unilateralism into bilateralism is not easy,

perhaps because of the current state of affairs between the two governments

of Palestine and Israel.

But the alternative is there. It is in the words of Sharon and his adviser.

They both spoke of the Geneva Initiative as being a major factor that

pushed them to adopt the unilateral disengagement with the Palestinians.

They both understood that the public and international momentum the

initiative gained was very likely to lead to an international pressure

campaign on Israel to accept the parameters of the Geneva Initiative. While

the unilateral disengagement may help Sharon for the time being, he will

ultimately have to face the necessity of starting a peace process, unless

he assumes the current impasse can continue permanently.

Only a negotiated settlement can end this conflict. Only a bilateral

process of talks between the leaderships in Israel and Palestine can lead

to such a settlement. Notwithstanding the fact that some may agree or

disagree with certain clauses in the Geneva Initiative, it remains the only

model that proves that peace is possible and doable. We strongly believe a

concerted effort has to continue both on the Palestinian and the Israeli

side to emphasize that the only game in town leading to a just solution is

the Geneva Initiative, nothing more and nothing less.

-----------------------------------------

Qaddoura Fares is a state minister in the Palestinian National Authority, a

member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and one of the signatories of

the Geneva Initiative. He is also member of the Supreme Steering Committee

of the Palestinian Peace Coalition / Geneva Initiative.

Source: Ha'aretz, October 26, 2004

Visit the Ha'aretz website at http://www.haaretzdaily.com/

Distributed by the Common Ground News Service.

Copyright permission has been obtained for publication.