Israel Should Annul the Oslo Accords. By Danny Danon.
Israel Should Annul the Oslo Accords. By Danny Danon. New York Times, September 20, 2013.
Danon:
JERUSALEM
— THIS month marks 20 years since the signing of the first of the Oslo Accords
between the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Two
decades after Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat stood on the White House lawn with
President Bill Clinton, Israelis and Palestinians are again in the midst of the
umpteenth round of negotiations.
Despite
these efforts, true peace seems as distant as it did before the secret talks in
Oslo were revealed to the world. The government of Israel must admit that we
made a mistake and declare that the Oslo process has failed.
Only by
officially annulling the Oslo Accords will we have the opportunity to rethink
the existing paradigm and hopefully lay the foundations for a more realistic
modus vivendi between the Jews and Arabs of this region.
Despite
attempts to rewrite recent history by fringe elements, the failure of the Oslo
framework cannot be attributed to a lack of will and persistence by Israel.
What didn’t we try? We attempted direct negotiations, third-party mediators,
public conferences and back-channel talks. We staged withdrawals and unilateral
disengagements, established joint Israeli-Palestinian military patrols in Gaza
and deployed American-trained security forces in the West Bank. None of this
worked.
The
P.L.O., and later the Palestinian Authority, never truly accepted that Israel,
as the national state and homeland of the Jewish people, was here to stay. No
amount of impressive ceremonies, cosmetic changes to the P.L.O. charter and
Palestinian doublespeak to Western media outlets about their commitment to
peace was able to change this grim fact.
To
understand the mind-boggling scope of Oslo’s failure, it is best to look at the
statistics. According to the organization B’Tselem, during the first
Palestinian intifada in 1987, six years before Mr. Rabin’s attempt to recast
the archterrorist Yasir Arafat as a peacemaker, 160 Israelis were murdered in
Palestinian terror attacks. In the mid- to late-1990s, as successive Israeli
governments negotiated with the Palestinians, and Mr. Arafat and his cronies
repeatedly swore they were doing their utmost to end terrorism, 240 Israelis
were brutally killed as suicide bombs and other heinous terrorist acts
targeting unarmed civilians were unleashed in every corner of our nation.
Things
did not get better after Prime Minister Ehud Barak made the Palestinians an
offer in 2000 that, judging by his landslide defeat in the election a few
months later, was way beyond what most Israelis supported. Between then and
September 2010, 1,083 Israelis were murdered by Palestinian terrorists.
The
Oslo process did not bring peace; it brought increased bloodshed. We must end
this farce by announcing the immediate suspension of the accords.
Little
impact would be felt by average Israelis and Palestinians. Those who would
suffer most would be full-time negotiators like Martin S. Indyk and Saeb
Erekat, who would find themselves out of a job after 20 years of gainful employment
in the peace process industry.
What
should replace Oslo’s false promise? We should implement what I have called a
“three-state solution.” In the future, the final status of the Palestinians
will be determined in a regional agreement involving Jordan and Egypt, when the
latter has been restabilized. All the region’s states must participate in the
process of creating a long-term solution for the Palestinian problem.
In the
short term, the Palestinians will continue to have autonomy over their civilian
lives while Israel remains in charge of security throughout Judea and Samaria,
commonly referred to as the West Bank. Following an initial period, the Arab
residents of Judea and Samaria could continue to develop their society as part
of an agreement involving Israel and Jordan. Similarly, Gaza residents could
work with Israel and Egypt to create a society that granted them full civil
authority over their lives in a manner that was acceptable to all sides.
Most
veterans of the peace process will mock this proposal, protesting that there is
no way it would be accepted by the Palestinians. Their argument may seem
convincing today, but as I often remind my critics, our region is
unpredictable. Had you told any Middle East expert five years ago that two successive
Egyptian presidents would be deposed and Bashar al-Assad’s regime would be in
the midst of a bloody civil war, you, too, would have been mocked. Things
change. We can make them change.
I am
aware that even if the Palestinians accepted this plan, we would still have to
deal with a fundamentalist Hamas regime in Gaza and continuing instability in
Egypt. No plan for Israeli-Arab peace can be fully implemented until these
issues are resolved.
In the
short term, Israel’s only option is to manage this conflict by refusing to
compromise when it comes to the security of Israeli citizens. At the same time,
our government should take all steps possible to improve the economic
well-being of the Palestinians.
The
dissolution of the Oslo Accords would serve as the official act validating what
we already know — that this failed framework is totally irrelevant in 2013.
Once the Palestinians were ready to sit down and seriously discuss how our two
peoples, through this new paradigm, could live side by side in peace and
prosperity, they would find willing partners across the political spectrum in
Israel.
It may
not be the utopian peace promised to all of us on that sunny day in September
1993, but in the harsh realities of the Middle East, this may be the best we
can hope for and the sole realistic chance for our children to grow up in a
world less violent than previous generations have had to endure.