What next for the Middle East Peace process? That was Thomas L. Friedman’s question in his New York Times column today, “Saudi Time.” He laid out the prospects and difficulties in moving forward. Both Israelis and Palestinians will need to do very heavy lifting within their own constituencies to avoid what is potentially the burial of the peace process.
His prescription? A bold move by King Abdullah to invite Prime Minister Netanyahu to Riyadh to hand him a copy of the visionary peace plan he tabled in 2002. The plan, known as the “Arab Initiative,” called for full Israeli withdrawal from all occupied territories in exchange for full normalization of relations with the Arab world. Abdullah’s plan was adopted unanimously by the Arab League at the Beirut Summit in 2002 and again at the Riyadh Summit in 2007. That year Benjamin Netanyahu, in the opposition Likud, rejected the plan.
In August 2008 Marwan Muasher, former Jordanian Foreign Minister and the first Jordanian ambassador to Israel, summarized the plan and why it languished on the shelf for six years. Writing in Haaretz:
“Six years ago, the Arab League took a bold step in the pursuit of a comprehensive and lasting peace in our region. At the Beirut Arab League Summit in 2002, 22 states unanimously adopted the Arab Peace Initiative – a historic document that offered a formula for ending not only the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but also the wider, lingering Arab-Israeli conflict, and to achieve a collective peace, security for all and normal relations with Israel. The initiative was the embodiment of the moderate camp in the Arab world and of its leap of faith in addressing both Arab and Israeli needs. Unfortunately, the Arab Peace Initiative was not related to seriously by the two players whose support and endorsement were crucial for its implementation: Neither Israel nor the United States responded with more than lip service. Arab states are also to be blamed for failing to explain the initiative to the Israeli public, our principal audience.”
A few months later Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas asked President-elect Barack Obama to use the plan as the basis of his peacemaking efforts. Early in the Obama Administration peace envoy George Mitchell said the U.S. would incorporate the Abdullah plan into its Mideast policy.
Now is time, according to Friedman to take up the plan again, but with “emotional punch.” The plan, he wrote, “has been floating out there in the ether of diplomatic possibilities ever since. But all that it has been doing is floating. It is time to bring it out of the air. King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”
Muasher, currently at the Carnegie Endowment following three years as a senior World Bank VP, is among those calling for the Abdullah plan to be the basis to moving the process forward. In a Financial Times op-ed this week, while calling a two-state solution no longer possible, he laid out the case for a regional approach in new negotiations:
“Instead of relying on pressure to cajole Israelis and Palestinians to act, a regional initiative allows both sides to find a settlement that serves their national interests. It also obliges Arabs to be responsible for pressing Hamas and Hezbollah. The US could still be responsible for collecting the so-called “end-game” deposits. These hypothetical pledges from all parties could be deposited with Washington, and committed to only if others are willing to do the same. Saudi Arabia, Syria, the Palestinians, and Israel will need to concede contentious points to get what they ultimately want.”
The heavy lifting Israelis and Palestinians have in front of them should have one more partner — Saudi Arabia — according to Friedman, “Both Israelis and Palestinians are going to have to do something really hard to produce a two-state solution. Saudi officials have developed a reputation in Washington for being experts at advising everyone else about the hard things they must do, while being reluctant to step out themselves. This is their moment — to do something hard and to do something important.”
What will Saudi Arabia see as its role in keeping Middle East peace from slipping into the abyss? Last year the Obama Administration sought “gestures” from Saudi Arabia as confidence building measures to bolster American efforts to achieve a West Bank settlement freeze. In response to calls for gestures Prince Turki Al Faisal wrote in an op-ed, “There have been increasing well-intentioned calls for Saudi Arabia to “do a Sadat”: King Abdullah travels to Israel and the Israelis reciprocate by making peace with Saudi Arabia. However, those urging such a move must remember that President Anwar el-Sadat of Egypt went to Israel in 1977 to meet with Prime Minister Menachem Begin only after Sadat’s envoy, Hassan el-Tohamy, Sadat’s envoy, was assured by the Israeli foreign minister, Moshe Dayan, that Israel would withdraw from every last inch of Egyptian territory in return for peace. Absent a similar offer today from Israel to the leaders of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, there is no reason to look at 1977 as a model.”
So will there be an “airport moment” for Abdullah to hand deliver a copy of his 2002 peace initiative to Netanyahu? Not likely. As Prince Turki said in his op-ed last year, “We are willing to embrace the hands of any partner in peace, but only after they have released their grip on Arab lands.”
{ 1 trackback }