An obstacle to peace

There are expectations and hopes that tentative steps at reform will grow into firmer strides

When Israel signed the Oslo accords with the Palestinians, it did so with great hopes for peace. It also did so with the understanding that both sides would respect the agreements.

Unfortunately, the Palestinians are perched on the brink of a material breach of these accords, most specifically the Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In that historic document, both sides pledged that nothing would be done that changes the status of the West Bank and Gaza and no unilateral act would be undertaken to alter the basic nature of these disputed territories.

Now the Palestinians are going to the UN to have these disputed territories declared a Palestinian state. This unilateral act will not only undermine the accords but will deal a severe blow to prospects for peace.

How can we expect to forge further agreements with Palestinians — that are necessary for peace — when they are violating one of their basic accords with Israel? To do so will harm one of the most basic principles of international law: respect for agreements.

But the greatest injury of these unilateral actions will be on the Palestinians themselves. It has long been their objective to see harm imposed on Israel. The history of the peace process has proven that the Palestinians are unwilling to make the compromises that both sides must undertake for peace to be achieved. Recognition of a Palestinian state at the UN will strengthen this tendency of Palestinian negotiators, driving true peace even further away.

The danger is not only political, it is also physical. According to reports, the Palestinians are planning large-scale demonstrations concurrent with their UN offensive. Even if the demonstrations were designed to be peaceful, such rallies have the habit of turning violent and pyrrhic. The last thing anyone wants is another round of violence in the Middle East.

Furthermore, the question of what kind of Palestinian state is to be declared, must be answered and elaborated.

According to international law, there are four elements of a state: a defined territory, a permanent population, the sovereign capacity to enter into relations with other states and finally, effective government. It is this last precondition that the Palestinians do not meet. The Palestinian Authority does not control the Gaza Strip and its reconciliation agreement with the Hamas rulers of Gaza has yet to be implemented. Yet even if the reconciliation succeeds, there is still the matter of the West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority has difficulties in governing their people. 

Without Hamas changing its actions and policies — there will be negative consequences for the nature of a Palestinian state. International recognition of a state that includes Hamas means international recognition of a proven terrorist organization. This group, dedicated to Israel’s destruction by the most violent means, refuses to recognize the three conditions of the Quartet (the US, UN, EU and Russia) by negating the existence of Israel, by continuing to use terrorism and by repudiating the agreements signed by Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Hamas’ recognition can only serve to legitimize terrorism and push peace farther away.

There may be those who think that by supporting this premature bid for statehood will help the Palestinians. But this UN maneuver is meaningless on the ground. It will do nothing to improve the lives of the Palestinians or solve the key issues that must be decided by the parties — mainly Jerusalem, security, borders, refugees and water. Instead, it will only delay negotiations and complicate the realities on the ground.

If the international community wants to help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it needs to tell the Palestinians that there are no shortcuts to peace, no instant solutions. We need to remind the Palestinians that peace is anchored on security and consensus. Nothing can be resolved without direct talks between the parties and compromises from both sides. The only true resolution is a negotiated resolution. The only path to peace is a negotiated path.