Guest columnist
Voices of hope in the Middle East

By Floyd J. McKay
Special to The Times

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

It got little play in daily news accounts, but Secretary of State Colin Powell's letter last week to negotiators of the so-called Geneva Accord was a powerful and important signal to those who watch affairs in the Middle East.

Powell told Israeli Yossi Beilin and Palestinian Yasser Abed Rabbo that, while still supporting the Bush administration's road map to peace, "we also believe that projects such as yours are important for sustaining hope and understanding."

That's diplomatic-speak intended to push Israeli and Palestinian leaders to end the bloody stalemate in the region.

The Geneva Accord, announced Oct. 14, was negotiated by what remains of Israel's peace movement and moderate Palestinians. It grants a Palestinian state including all of Gaza, 98 percent of the West Bank, and the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem. Israel would withdraw most settlements from the West Bank, and Palestinians would surrender a "right of return" to former homes within Israel.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government promptly blasted the idea; Yasser Arafat has remained silent, but Rabbo is a close confidant of the Palestinian leader. Beilin, on the other hand, as a former Labor minister, is an opponent of Sharon.

The Geneva Accord process also gained an endorsement from United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. Since the entire document has not been unveiled, neither Powell nor Annan have endorsed the document itself — only the process. But even that provides a glimmer of hope in the war-torn region.

When I was in the region in 1982 reporting a documentary for King Broadcasting, two elements of the conflict struck me as central to any peacemaking: Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and a "right of return" for displaced Palestinians.

Until the settlements — or certainly most of them — are removed, the West Bank will be occupied territory, and militants will continue to violently oppose the occupiers. If we didn't understand that before, certainly our present experience in Iraq should tell us about occupying powers. And we've been there only a matter of months, not 35 years.

And until Palestinians renounce the right of return, Israel cannot protect its Jewish identity and remain a democracy. If all, or even large numbers, of Palestinian refugees were allowed to resettle in Israel, they would in a short time outnumber Jews. The state of Israel would then lose the Jewish identity that brought it into existence, unless it denied equality to the Arabs in the manner of apartheid South Africa. Neither undesirable outcome should be forced on Israel.

So, ultimately, the settlements and the right of return must be reversed. Previous proposals have avoided coming to grips with these knotty issues, and both sides have been adamant that they would not give an inch. But unless they do, there will be no permanent peace.

Two decades ago, when I visited the region, it was still possible to talk to reasonable Israelis and Palestinians and, more importantly, for them to talk to each other.

In the ensuing period, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the intifada, Palestinian suicide bombers and Israeli tanks and bulldozers have made dialogue difficult and even dangerous. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin, who shared a Nobel Peace Prize with Arafat, was assassinated for engaging in dialogue.

Negotiators Abbo and Beilin are veterans of the conflict, and perhaps part of a new wave of leadership in the region. Sharon and Arafat, tired and bitter old men incapable of giving in or moving on, are nearing the end of their reigns and someone must provide a ray of hope.

Powell, and Annan as well, have hands tied by their bosses, particularly in the case of Powell. President Bush last week asked Congress to give Israel $2.22 billion in military aid next year, by far the largest amount for any nation. And Annan's hands are tied to some degree by the U.N. Security Council, where theU. S. regularly exercises a veto on behalf of Israel.

Because of our sponsorship of Israel, we have little credibility with Arab governments. The Geneva Accord was financed by Britain, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway, and could help balance America's pro-Israel tilt. But we remain the critical power because of that tilt — we are the one voice Israel must at least listen to.

Powell would not have sent that letter without Bush's approval, and Annan is confident of backing by other nations in the United Nations. Their low-key but firm voices must be heard over the tired old rhetoric of the region.

Floyd J. McKay, a journalism professor at Western Washington University, is a regular contributor to Times editorial pages. E-mail him at floydmckay@yahoo.com

Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company