In a recent New York Times Opinion piece, Amos Oz characterized the perverse symbiosis between Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon as a single individual, Mr. Sharafat. The problem with Mr. Sharafat is that he is unable to lead his people to peace.
Today's Arab summit is crucial for the future of the Middle East. The Saudis are trying to mollify the US, the Palestinians are trying to get themselves a state, and everyone is trying to prevent America from attacking Iraq.
The Saudi proposal - normalizing relations with Israel if it withdraws to its pre-1967 borders - will be the big ticket item. If Mr. Arafat is allowed to attend, which at the time of press seems unlikely, there is a chance things could go well. The best outcome would be a unified acceptance of the Saudi proposal that is not watered down with rhetoric and half-measures.
However, this is a long shot. The Middle East is rapidly approaching critical mass, and anti-Israel and anti-American feelings are stronger than they have been in many years. The violence is getting worse, not better, and it seems absurd to talk peace when people on both sides are dying.
Yet that is exactly what must happen.
The bitter irony is that everybody knows what is needed for peace. The final plan will no doubt look very similar to the various proposals of the last three years. Israel must withdraw essentially to the pre-1967 borders and the Palestinians must accept only a handful of returned refugees; Israel must cede some of Jerusalem and the Palestinians themselves must accept shared sovereignty; Israel must rein in its settlements and the Palestinians must accept 97 percent or so of the West Bank; Mr. Arafat must do his utmost to control terrorism and Israel must understand that he does not have the ability to turn the violence off like a switch. None of this is news.
The longer Mr. Sharafat puts off negotiations, the harder it will be later on. He has become his own prisoner, unable to move forward or break out of the downward gyre. He claims that his people will not accept the peace proposal and is unwilling to sell the idea.
For a minority in each nation, he is right - they will never accept compromise. Yet most people on both sides desire what everyone wants: security, prosperity and freedom - three elements lacking in the status quo. Instead of tapping into this perfectly reasonable sentiment, Mr. Sharafat plays into the hands of extremists.
What is most remarkable is the nihilism of the Palestinian militants - people who are so utterly hopeless that they will kill themselves provided they take a handful of Israeli citizens with them - and the Israeli belief that enough retaliation will actually beat the Palestinians into submission. Both positions are patently ludicrous. No amount of the current bloodshed will end Israel or stop suicide bombings.
The US for its part has not done enough for peace. The Bush administration has still not thrown its full weight behind adopting the Mitchell Commission proposals - a necessary precondition for negotiations. By not putting enough effort towards peace, we are undermining the stability of the Middle East and allowing the same hatred of Sept. 11 to fester.
One way or another, it is likely that international troops - including Americans - will be required to ensure security once a peace settlement is reached. A gradual withdrawal of Israel from the Occupied Territories should be assisted with international peacekeepers and Palestinian security forces. Otherwise, Israel will never feel secure in its new borders.
Bertrand Russell said that violence does not determine who is right - only who is left. With every Palestinian boy shot and every Israeli mother blown up, the extremists on both sides gain a victory. Now more than ever is the time for courageous moderates on both sides to speak up and lead. Yitzhak Rabin did it. Ehud Barak did it. Anwar Sadat did it. Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah is starting to do it. But Mr. Sharafat is not doing it, and it is unlikely he ever will.
