July 4 1996

Land for peace is a base for peace

ISRAELI PRIME Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent statement that the land-for-peace formula could not be a basis for peace in the Middle East undermines hopes that the new Israeli government will honor commitments made by its predecessors and that it will move forward towards a comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Mr Netanyahu's position was made few days after leaders of the world's industrialized nations, meeting in France, reaffirmed the principle of land for peace in their summit statement. The Arab leaders meeting in Cairo a week before also made it clear that the formula, which Israel accepted in Madrid, was still the cornerstone for peace in the region.

The G-7 summit position must not be taken lightly by Israel. Mr Netanyahu risks isolating Israel if he chooses to squander an opportunity to make peace with the Arab world and guarantee Israel's security.

But since his election, Mr Netanyahu has been repeating his objection to the principle of trading land with Israel's neighbors. He says that Israel has already given away too much and that it will be compromising its security if it gives any more especially when it comes to the Golan.

Mr Netanyahu's gamble will not work. Because his peace for peace proposal serves only Israel's interest and leaves other parties out. Mr Netanyahu must not forget that the land Israel will be trading is occupied territory. It is not Israel's to start with. Land is the core of the Middle East conflict and the absence of this important factor from any peace proposal will automatically condemn it to failure.

Israel is now committed, both legally and morally, to honor its obligations under peace treaties and agreements. Israel cannot afford to turn back the clock and suck the region into an era of cold war politics. No single party has an interest in that, not the Americans, not the Europeans and certainly not the Arabs.

To disengage from the peace process remains an option for Mr Netanyahu in spite of his assurances that his government wants peace. But can he afford to do that?

The Arabs must not allow Mr Netanyahu's statements to dispel their efforts to put forward an Arab strategy to deal with changing realities in the region. To start with, they should allow some initial dialogue to go on with the new Israeli government, but only to understand the true position of the Israeli leadership on withdrawal from Palestinian lands, the final status negotiations with the PNA, the right of self-determination for the Palestinian people and the rights of refugees and the displaced and Israel's withdrawal from Syrian and Lebanese occupied territories.

Netanyahu must understand that he risks destroying all of Israel's achievements in the past four to five years if he chooses to walk away from Israel's obligations to peace. He must understand that peace has a price and that continuing Israel's occupation of Arab land cannot continue if peace is to have a chance in the Middle East.