Caroline Glick on the upcoming peace conference

Jewish World Review Oct. 8, 2007 / 26 Tishrei 5768 In the name of 'promoting peace,' Rice and her Israeli underlingscould foment a new war By Caroline B. Glick Rice and Abbas http://www.jewishworldreview.com/ US Secretary of State CondoleezzaRice is moving boldly down the rabbit hole. This week, Rice is due back inthe Middle East for meetings in Jerusalem and Ramallah. The purpose of herupcoming visit, like her previous ones, will be to pressure the Olmertgovernment and the Fatah terror organization to reach "substantiveagreements" that she'll be able to present to the world at her peace summitin Maryland next month. It is far from clear what American interests Rice is advancing withher unswerving effort to reach a peace accord between Israel and Fatah.Indeed, Rice's efforts are detrimental to US interests in the region. On Tuesday, 77 senators signed a letter to Rice regarding her plansfor the summit. Among other things, the senators called on the Arab states,which Rice hopes will participate, to "recognize Israel's right to exist andnot use such recognition as a bargaining chip for future Israeliconcessions." The senators' warning was well placed. Far from cooperating with theUS, the Arab world is undercutting its policies. Not only are the Arabs -including Egypt and Jordan - distancing themselves from Israel; in a directslap at the US, the Arabs are subverting the US's goal of isolating Hamas.Rather than blackball the jihadist movement, the Arab states led by Egyptand Saudi Arabia are devoting themselves to bringing about a rapprochementbetween Fatah and Hamas. Unfortunately, due to Rice's missteps, the US today has littleinfluence over the Arab states. Washington's primary diplomatic leverageover the Arabs stems from its ability to confer legitimacy on them. The UScould have used this leverage if it had stated from the outset that it wouldonly invite states to the Middle East conference that support the US's goalsof isolating Hamas and accepting Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. But rather than condition their invitation, Rice and President GeorgeW. Bush made it clear from the outset that they want Arab states toparticipate in the summit. In so doing, the US turned the turned the tableson itself. Now it is the Arabs who by accepting or rejecting the US offerwill confer legitimacy on Washington. Needless to say, in the interests ofsecuring their participation, states like Saudi Arabia and Egypt will not becalled to task for their sponsorship of Hamas or their hostility towardIsrael. So the US has been weakened just by organizing the conference. Yet, ifthere were any chance that the conference next month in Annapolis couldyield real progress toward peace, then at least the Arabs' humiliation ofWashington could be said to have been worth it. Given that since the failed Camp David summit in 2000 the Palestinianshave yet to make one substantive concession to Israel, it is clear that theonly way the upcoming conference can succeed in advancing peace is if thePalestinians make some dramatic concession to Israel. But there is absolutely no chance that the Palestinians will beforthcoming. Fatah Chairman Mahmoud Abbas led Fatah to electoral defeat toHamas in 2006 and to surrender in Gaza in June. The only reason that Abbasremains in power in Judea and Samaria is because the IDF is maintainingsecurity there. The weak, ineffectual Abbas has no ability to agree to Israeli offersthat Yasser Arafat rejected. In addition to Arafat's legacy, Abbas has Hamasto contend with. Any major concessions to Israel would imperil his rule -and his life. Over the past week, Abbas announced his adherence to maximalPalestinian demands from Israel. These include the full transfer ofsovereignty over the Temple Mount to the Palestinians; the completesurrender of Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians; and an Israeliacceptance of the so-called "right of return" that would force Israel toaccept millions of foreign Arabs as immigrants within its truncated borders.Abbas's stances are a reflection of his inability to make any concessionsfor peace. The failure of Rice's summit will directly benefit Hamas, which willbe able to say that as it had warned, diplomacy is pointless. Understandingthis, Abbas himself has let it be known that he is negotiating with Hamas.Then too, ahead of his meeting this past Wednesday with Prime Minister EhudOlmert, Abbas dispatched his representatives to threaten Israel with war. On Tuesday, Abbas confidante and representative in negotiations withHamas Azzam al-Ahmed told reporters, "If we don't prepare well for theconference so that it will result in something positive, the repercussionswill be more dangerous than what happened after the failure of Camp David." Hamas is not the only actor that will be strengthened by the failureof the summit. Anti-American, jihadist forces throughout the Arab world willsimilarly benefit. Like Hamas, they will be able to say, "We told you so."America's humiliation will also weaken liberal democratic voices in the Arabworld. With America perceived as weak and incompetent, they will feelcompelled to join the anti-American bandwagon. RICE IS dragging Israel with her in her madcap descent down thediplomatic rabbit hole - and not for the first time. Rice has a record offorcing Israel to sacrifice its security in the interest of her "peace"processes. In November 2005, Rice coerced then-prime minister Ariel Sharon intoaccepting her agreement on the passages joining Gaza to Egypt and Israel.That agreement denied Israel the ability to prevent terrorists and arms frombeing smuggled into Gaza. This week's Egyptian agreement to allow some 90Hamas terrorists - many of whom underwent military training in Iran andSyria - to enter Gaza was easily implemented in spite of Israeli objectionsin large part as a consequence of Rice's heavy-handed treatment of Israel. So too, Rice forced Israel to agree to have US Lt.-Gen. Keith Daytontrain and arm Fatah forces in Gaza. That disastrous plan led to the indirectUS arming of Hamas when Fatah forces surrendered their weapons to Hamaswithout a fight in June. And of course, Rice was the architect of thecease-fire with Hizbullah last year that has enabled the Iranian terrorgroup to rearm and to reassert its control over south Lebanon. ALTHOUGH THE content of the talks is officially secret, various leaksmake the depth of Israeli concessions clear. Israel is agreeing to transfersovereignty over Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem to the Palestinians and torenounce its sovereignty over the Temple Mount; Olmert and his colleagueshave agreed to surrender more than 90 percent of Judea and Samaria to thePalestinians while destroying most of the Israeli communities there; andIsrael is agreeing to certain "symbolic" concessions regarding the so-called"right of return." In short, Olmert is regurgitating former prime minister and currentDefense Minister Ehud Barak's offers to Arafat at Camp David and Taba fromseven years ago. Many on the Left argue that since Israel offered these concessions inthe past, the fact that the government is returning them to the bargainingtable today is nothing to get excited about. This is untrue. There is a huge difference between the situation in 2000 and today.Seven years ago, Barak's offer of territory was based on the expectationthat in exchange for territory the Palestinians would eschew terror and liveat peace with Israel. Today, after seven years of war that was largelydirected by Fatah, after Hamas's takeover of Gaza and Iran's takeover ofHamas, this expectation is no longer realistic. By offering Barak'sconcessions for a second time, Olmert isn't simply offering land. He issending the message that Israel neither expects nor demands that thePalestinian state live at peace with Israel. Perhaps Israel's greatest diplomatic failure since 2000 has been itsfailure to disavow Barak's offers and remove them from the negotiatingtable. Once Arafat refused Barak's far-reaching concessions and choseinstead to launch a war against the Jewish state, Israel had numerousopportunities to make clear these concession were no longer on offer. Disavowing them is crucial not simply because they are diplomaticallyunwise. They are strategically suicidal. As Israel's experience in south Lebanon and Gaza show clearly, areasthat Israel vacates become terrorist enclaves. Given Abbas's embrace ofterrorism and his political weakness, it is absolutely clear that an Israeliwithdrawal from Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem will render these areas terrorbases as well. Yet here the consequences will be far worse that those ofprevious withdrawals. An Israeli surrender of Judea, Samaria and parts ofJerusalem will divest Israel of the ability to defend itself. Although theoretically attractive, it is impossible to partitionJerusalem between Arab and Jewish neighborhoods because there is nogeographical distinction between Arab and Jewish neighborhoods. Beyond that,if Jerusalem is partitioned, the Arabs with Israeli ID cards will move tothe Jewish neighborhoods and Arabs from Judea will flood the Arabneighborhoods. Far from strengthening the Jewish character of the Jewishhalf of the city, a partition will destroy Jewish Jerusalem. The Jews willflee, and the eternal capital of the Jewish people will be transformed intoan Arab city. As for Judea and Samaria, not only would their handover transform250,000 Israelis into internal refugees, it would leave 80% of the citizensof the truncated Jewish state within mortar and rocket range of thePalestinian state. Moreover, an Israeli relinquishment of the areas willclear the way for Arab armies to enter the Jordan Valley unopposed. The pathfrom there to the Mediterranean is a short and easy one. Given all of this, it is manifestly clear that by succumbing to Rice'sobsession with summitry, the Olmert government is playing with fire. It iscommitting Israel to negotiating positions that deny the country the abilityto demand that the Palestinians come to terms with the Jewish state and liveat peace with it. And it is rendering strategically suicidal seven-year oldoffers the starting point of all negotiations for years to come. On Wednesday, the State Department announced that Rice's conference isbeing postponed until the end of November to give the parties sufficienttime to "prepare the groundwork" to somehow ensure the summit's success.Also Wednesday, Olmert and Abbas reportedly agreed that the conference wouldbe nothing more than the starting point for future negotiations. It can only be hoped that these approaches will be combined. Allnegotiations should be postponed until after the summit, and the summitshould be delayed for weeks, then months, then years. Otherwise, in the nameof "promoting peace," Rice and her Israeli underlings will foment a new war.