Politicians throughout Israel, the rest of the Middle East, and the United States continue using the prospects of renewing the peace process as a tool towards garnering public support and international prestige.
The Obama Administration will soon host the leaders of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and Egypt in an effort to jump start the negotiations at the outset of the President’s first year in office. New Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu traveled to Egypt and exclaimed pride that negotiations could resume in the coming weeks. PA President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the formation of a new government excluding Hamas and repeatedly calls on Israeli leaders to recognize the need for Palestinian self-determination. Jordanian King Abdullah spoke candidly in Washington D.C. about the need for a resumption of peace talks and continues his stump through the world media, saying that war could erupt if the parties do not reach a solution within the next year and a half. The Arab League is even considering revoking the Arab Peace Plan if Israel does not accept the document.
Regardless of all the hype surrounding theses calls for a renewed and reinvigorated peace process, all the leaders involved continue to ground their efforts in dogma instead of actual political might. Alongside acknowledging the need for a hasty resumption to peace talks, statesmen involved in the process should begin invoking their own leverage towards a viable and lasting conclusion to the decades-long confrontation between Israel and the Arab world.
Within the Middle East, Arab states must use their economic, political, and military assets to thwart the rise in Islamic extremism that fuels terrorism, thereby preventing an adequate security situation in Israel. As Iran consistently supplies Hezbollah and Hamas with weaponry and funding, the rest of the Arab states should alienate Iran and its allies further as a show of commitment towards a peaceful resolution to the peace process. Egypt began taking the initiative on this effort by launching a manhunt for Hezbollah agents intent on carrying out attacks on Israelis vacationing in the Sinai Peninsula. However, Egypt’s efforts only represent a fraction of the leverage afforded to the Arab world; without preventing terrorism on Israel, merely exclaiming the need for a two-state solution remains an untenable assertion that lacks real will towards peace.
Similarly, the Arab world’s insistence on the right of return to Israel for Palestinian refugees cannot further dialogue towards achieving a two-state solution. Instead of a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian state, the right of return would permit millions of Palestinians into Israel, thereby establishing a Jewish minority in the territory. This demographic shift would rapidly nullify the two-state solution by transforming Israel into a non-Jewish state that may potentially then reintegrate with the Palestinian state, thereby effectively creating a one-state solution. The right of return undermines the foundation of a two-state solution, and Arab leaders should consider the issue non-negotiable.
The PA should continue its efforts to alienate Hamas internally and, through the resumption of a peace process that would likely provide economic stimulus to the territories, prove to the residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip that radicalism and violence cannot improve their daily lives. By establishing a viable alternative to Hamas, the PA could amass the popular support obtained by Hamas in previous elections. While alienating Hamas politically, the PA should increase efforts for domestic security through the detainment of terrorists to limit the influence of internal radicals. Similarly, the PA must recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state to quell any concerns that a two-state solution only represents a path to eventual Palestinian domination of the area from “the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea”
While the Arab World must concede some of its principles in order to actualize the resumption of the peace process, Israel must also begin to strive towards a two-state solution. Primarily, the continued growth and construction of settlements in the West Bank only undermines any overtures towards peace by the current administration. The settlements merely inflame current animosity between Israelis and Palestinians while only serving to cement Israel’s claim on the territories and Jerusalem. Instead of aggravating the peace process through the establishment of additional settlements, Israel should unequivocally freeze construction until the conclusion of the peace process.
Moreover, Netanyahu’s commitment to a two-state solution remains in doubt by the international community. He should clarify his stance by unequivocally declaring the right of Palestinians to self-determination through the establishment of an independent state alongside Israel. This assertion would immediately silence the critics of the current Israeli administration and prove to the world Netanyahu’s intent on resuming viable peace negotiations.
As the regional leaders prepare to discuss the resumption of negotiations with President Barack Obama, the United States must also clarify its ability to mandate a changed posture towards peace in the region. Instead of merely advocating peace and convening summits, the Administration should threaten to use its primary source of leverage in altering regional dynamics- money. The White House and Congress should include a caveat on funding to Israel that reduces the amount of aid based directly on the development of each new settlement and Israel’s expansion into the territories. U.S. officials repeatedly insisted that a freeze on settlements remain the first step towards a viable peace process; the government should back those words with weight. Similarly, a recent increase in funding from the U.S. government towards the Palestinians shows no inklings of disapproval regarding the seemingly endless rocket attacks on southern Israel. By limiting funds based on these strikes, the White House could mandate from the Palestinians a simple ultimatum: increased terrorism results directly in a decrease of aid. This formula would also assist in limiting Hamas’ influence due to the clear tie between economic growth and supporting terror.
The upcoming meetings in Washington should strive towards eliciting a changed in posture from regional leaders. Instead of solely proclaiming the need for a two-state solution and a renewed peace process, these statesmen must actually couple their dogma with actions. Until the Middle East’s leaders begin proving their intentions through a change in conduct, then their rhetoric remains just that- unfounded words with no basis in reality used only for filler in the following day’s headlines.
