Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Saudi Crown prince Abdullah has recently put forward a peace plan for ending the conflict in the Middle East. Indeed the plan makes a magnanimous but conditional offer to recognize Israel provided the Israelis vacate all the occupied lands. Since 1967 it has only withdrawn from Sinai as a part of Camp David accord in exchange for diplomatic recognition by Egypt. Both the Arab states as well as influential counties including the US have welcomed the plan. The US president praised Abdullah's idea of full-Arab normalization once a comprehensive peace agreement has been reached. President Jacques Chirac informed Abdullah France's decision to support the peace plan. Being a positive gesture it is quickly gaining requisite acknowledgement and support from various quarters interested in regional peace.

While the plan would be spelled out in detail at the time of next Arab League summit meeting scheduled for 27-28 March, its early announcement could enable many concerned to gauge the feelings of the both Jewish and Arabs in the region. In addition the world leaders could also assess its contours and make positive approaches towards securing a stable peace in the region. In the absence of any major peace initiative currently, the Saudi plan certainly deserve attention and support.

During the last 18 months of intifada many Palestinians have died in their quest for independence. With the advent of Sharon regime the violence level has increased many-fold. Despite the fact that Sharon is known as the butcher of Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps, the Israelis seemed to have voted for Sharon expecting that a hard line pursuit would bring the desired peace. Instead what has been witnessed ever since he assumed power is nothing but intensified violence? Almost everyday many Palestinians civilians are killed by Israeli war machine. Belief in the notion of chosen people, self -righteousness and its military might, the Israelis have spared no opportunity to kill the innocent civilians. If there is no opportunity the Israeli soldiers and the current leadership create situations that enables them to continue their killing spree. Nevertheless it needs to stress here that the strong-arm tactics of the Israelis have utterly failed to subdue the Palestinians. Besides the press reports are already indicating that many Israelis are increasingly getting disappointed and dismayed by the continuous failure of Sharon policies.

While the details of the Saudi plan are not yet made public, the plan deserve to be examined in terms of it significance and likely impediments. Among the important aspects one needs to examine are timing, symbolism, usefulness and the likely impediments. It is extremely significant that the plan was unfolded just before the Haj. Not only the Muslims from all over the world had gathered at Mecca to perform their religious duties but were also in a state of mind in which they could rationally analyze plans that could inject peace in the region.

The second important aspect that deserves considerations is that the plan has been put forward by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia enjoys a special status among the Muslims and its rulers being the custodian of the holy places command enormous respect from the Muslims all over the world. Besides, the Saudis are also on good terms with most of the influential western powers. Cognizant of the Saudi influence over most of the Islamic world, many western countries fully comprehend the significance of a peace plan coming out of Saudi Arabia. In addition, it cannot be overlooked that the Saudis maintained a posture towards Israel, which was indeed truly reflective of most of the Islamic countries. If nothing else a Saudi peace plan would entail a great symbolic value.

The third main element of the plan revolves around its usefulness. The Israelis need to ask themselves that what is their most important objective. Does the plan offer some move forward towards the attainment of their objective? Does the plan offer the requisite level of guarantees? Could the plan facilitate the advent of permanent peace? Scanning through most statements of the Israeli leaders over the last 53 years of Isreal's independent existence it is not too far fetched to assume that the most important Israeli objective is peace and stability. As the plan offers that following the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied lands, almost all the surrounding Arab countries would extend recognition, which, in turn, would enable the Israelis to live peacefully in the region.

If the Israeli objective is to extend its borders and capture more and more Arab lands over the years on flimsy excuses, then the chances for protracted struggle are much greater. One can understand the inability of the Arabs to oust the Israelis from occupied land at the moment but then the nature of international relations is dynamic and the situations keep changing and the emergence of conducive developments may prove extremely detrimental to Israeli interests. The continuous killings of Palestinian youngsters are only going to make the reconciliation rather difficult.

Among the impediments that could derail the envisaged peace process rather successfully include the return of Palestinian refugees that have been living in various countries for years, the expanded Israeli settlements, the return of Golan Heights and the fate of Jerusalem. Apart from the future status of Jerusalem, which could prove to be somewhat tricky, all others issues could be resolved provided the parties involved are determined to opt for permanent peace. Return of Palestinian diasporas and refugees could not pose any major problem if all the occupied lands are returned. Similarly the return of Golan Heights should be treated as part of the overall deal to return all territories that were occupied by the Israelis over the years.

The two issues revolving around the fate of Jewish settlements on the west bank areas as well as the future status of Jerusalem could pose some problems. Jewish settlements were the product of various Israeli governments' continuous encouragements to incoming Jewish migrants. The existence these settlements continuously remind the Palestinians that the Israeli objectives include expansion of its borders. Thus it is indeed imperative to find some form of solution to appease the settlers. They can be awarded land within the Israeli borders and some form of monetary assistance could be promised by the donor agencies to enable the resettlement of the settlers. A fund to initiate a process of resettlement of the settlers could be established. A time frame could also be set for the vacation of these settlements. The vacation of settlements on the occupied lands and resettlement processes could start simultaneously.

Perhaps most complex issue would be the fate of Jerusalem. If the emotional aspect of the issue is divorced from the realities, the issue can be settled. The Palestinian would like to secure the complete control of the Jerusalem but the Israeli would not agree to handover the total control back to the Palestinians. Thus it is going generate heated debates among both the Israelis and the Palestinians. Undoubtedly the Palestinian would not accept the control of entire Jerusalem with the Israeli authorities. A divided Jerusalem could turn out to be a panacea with the Muslims controlling all those parts deemed to be extremely dear to them and the Israelis retaining the control of those areas that contains their religious places. For future smooth working of a divided Jerusalem, neither should make Jerusalem a capital city. Instead Jerusalem should be declared as a city of peace with divided control.

The Israeli president Moshe Katav's expressed desire to travel to Saudi Arabia in order to explore the prospects of this latest peace proposal certainly augurs well for region's future. Admittedly many peace proposals have been put forward by different people at different times and almost all of them were killed for one reason or the other, this does not mean that all new efforts need not be welcomed particularly in view of the Israeli attitudes and policies. The rapidity with which the Abdullah proposal is gaining momentum and accompanying support, it would not be too far fetched to assume that the much awaited resumption of peace process might materialize much quicker than expected. A quick replacement of violence with negotiations could accelerate the pace of peace process leading to the establishment of desired Palestinian state as envisaged in the Oslo Accord on one hand and provide the desired recognition and security for the Israelis on the other. The persistence in violent approaches could only invoke reactive violence and may eventually prove extremely detrimental to the regional interests of all the involved actors.