Something peculiar happened to the two words “safe passage”.
When this term was coined in the Oslo agreements, the intention was that the passage will be”safe” for the Palestinians. Now it seems that Barak and his people mean that it will be “safe”for Israel.
Let us remind those that have forgotten (or who never knew): The “safe passage” was already apart of the Cairo agreement (1994), and was mentioned again in Annex 1 of the Interim Agreement(1995). Even in the original Declaration of Principles (1993), it was said that the West Bankand the Gaza Strip constitute “a single territorial unit, whose integrity will be preservedduring the interim period” (Article IV). In order to implement this principle, several safepassages were agreed upon set out precisely on the map attached to the agreement. They were tobe opened already in May 1994. Like dozens of other articles, this one too was violated by thegovernments of Rabin, Peres and Netanyahu.
From the wording and context of the article, it is quite clear that it refers to passages wherethe Palestinians will move freely between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, in order toimplement the principle that they are a single unit, in spite of the geographical division.The agreements do not state that the passages will be exterritorial, because they do not dealwith Palestinian sovereignty, but it is obvious that this was meant in practice.
Now, after a slight delay of five years and five months, Barak offers to respect theobligation. Respect in a peculiar way. Because the offer is far from the implementation of theoriginal agreement.
First of all, only one single passage is offered. For a Palestinian, it will be easier to flyfrom Gaza to Rome, using the new international airport, then to travel by land from Gaza toNablus. And, more importantly, the “safe” passage will be extremely unsafe for him: he willnot be sure that he will be allowed to use it at all, and he will not be sure that he will not bearrested on the way. Every trip will be subject to bureaucratic harassment, in the best case,and constitute a wager on his freedom, in the worst case.
The Israeli officers who are conducting the negotiations (if one can call this diktatnegotiations) want to make sure that every single phase of the passage will be under completeIsraeli control. For the sake of security.
This is a bad omen for the future. The former Chief of Staff, who is the present Prime Minister,has put all the matters concerning peace with the Palestinians into the hands of a group ofarmy, Mossad and Shin-Bet officers. This week it was reported that the Shin-Bet agrees to thesetting up of a Palestinian state. This is, too, the opinion of the army and the Mossad, andtherefore also of Ehud Barak. But when they say “state”, what do they mean?
As far as territory is concerned, they mean to tear away large chunks of land for the so-called”settlement blocs”, including the settlements and hill-top outposts that are being builtthese very days under the auspices of the army. But in the remaining territory – some 15% ofMandatory Palestine – they do not want a real state to be created. They want an entity that willbe completely cut off from the surrounding countries. The air and sea ports, the borderpassages to Egypt and Jordan, the passages between the separate parts of the state itself – allwill be under total Israeli control. No person and no goods will pass without an Israelipermit. No Palestinian will come home without Israeli consent. No Palestinian will serve inthe Palestinian Police and bear arms without Israeli confirmation. All this under thepretext of “security” – a pretext that justifies practically everything. Even when aPalestinian breathes he may endanger security – after all, who knows whether he does not takeaway air from a settler?
In international parlance, such an entity is called “Bantustan” – after the “homelands” setup by the racist white regime in South Africa for the blacks (who belonged to the Bantu tribes).The territories enjoyed nominal autonomy, even some trappings of sovereignty, but inreality they where completely under the control of the white overlords.
The dream of creating a Palestinian Bantustan is, of course, ludicrous. No Palestinian willaccept such a state. The Palestinians are no Bantus (and even the Bantus did eventuallydestroy the apartheid regime). The whole plan is based on an abysmal contempt of theintelligence officers for the Palestinian people and its leaders – a contempt that hasalready brought on us disaster in the past.
The same logic that has already compelled successive Israeli governments against their willto recognize the existence of the Palestinian people and negotiate with Yassir Aarafat, willalso bury the idea of the Bantustan. Barak and his people, too, will learn from experience.Pity for the time wasted and all that will happen on the way.