Only the Likud could sign such an agreement without the country going upin flames.
45 years ago, when we were barely a handful of individuals working forpeace with a Palestinian state, even in our wildest dreams we could nothave envisioned that a day would come when a leader of Herut would sign anagreement with the leader of the Palestinian national movememnt. Themessiah must be coming.
Obviously, Netanyahu did not sign the agreement willingly. He stillyearns for Greater Israel, a land free of Arabs. But he knows that acompromise with the Palestinians is unavoidable. And that is our realvictory.
Following the signing of the Oslo Accords, we initiated a serious debateabout the agreement in the peace camp. There were those who said:”It is a bad agreement. Arafat gave in to the Israeli dictate. Itwill not bring about peace.” Others (myself among them) claimed:”Indeed, it is a bad agreement, as full of holes as a chunk of Swisscheese. But it starts the dynamics of peace which will fromnow on gain momentum.”
At that time, I remembered the words that Rabin spoke tome in 1975, when he was serving his first term as Prime Minister. Ireported to him on my initial secret contacts with the leadership ofthe PLO. He was strongly opposed to my suggestions and said: “Thefirst step that we take toward the Palestinians would inevitably leadto the establishment of a Palestinian state.” And lo and behold, in1993 Rabin took that first step (and what a step that was!).
Now Binyamin Netanyahu has taken his step too, and it will inevitably leadto the establishment of a Palestinian state. I do no care how Netanyahuexplains this act to himself, to his father and to his public. Mostlikely, he sees it as a tactical move, and his intention is to break itfirst chance he gets. No matter. History cares not about intentions butabout results. Sometimes, the road to paradise is paved withbad intentions.
Public polls have long since proved that the majority of the Israelipublic accepts it as fact that a Palestinian state will come intobeing side by side with Israel. Now it has been proven that themajority of the Israeli public (including the majority of Likud andOriental voters) accepts Netanyahu’s agreement to return a largeportion of the West Bank to the Palestinian state-in-the-making.
Netanyahu signed because President Clinton left him no choice. Thedream of a Greater Israel is clashing head on with the fundamentalsecurity needs of Israel: Maintaining good relations with the U.S. at allcosts.
Netanyahu had gambled on Clinton’s enemies, and lost. He thinks that heunderstands the U.S. where he grew up. Now he has learned a newlesson. It was expressed with brutal simplicity by MadeleineAlbright, when Netanyahu threatened to abandon the conference:”You do not do this to the President of the United States!” Innormal times, it may appear as if the Israeli tail wags the Americandog. But during a time of trial, it becomes clear that the tail isjust a tail, and the dog is a very large one indeed. A president introuble, as President Clinton is, must be considerably more forcefulthan the average president, because he has a more compelling need todeliver a political achievement.
Contrary to Netanyahu’s miscalculation, Arafat’s calculations worked.Many of his people have not understood his actions in the past few years(and not for the first time, either). He had set a strategy: To weakenthe Israeli-American alliance and establish an American-Palestinianalliance. It seemed like an impossible mission, but he stuck to it withtenacity and stubbornness for many years, years through which he sufferedhumiliation and smears from Israel, and much the same from near-sightedPalestinians.
Now his persistence has proven itself, and that is the real essence of theWye Accords: The U.S. has ceased being a passive observer which givesunconditional support to the government of Israel. Now it plays the roleof an active referee. Netanyahu will no longer be able to claim that”the Palestinians have violated their guarantees” (while he himselfviolates dozens of clauses). From now on there will be someone todetermine if there is a violation — and who the violator is. Andthat is a tremendous change in favor of the Palestinians.
True, the new agreement is also not a good one. It, too, is full ofholes. But it is an immense improvement of the situation. And there isan immense benefit to the fact that it has been signed by the Likud.
Let us not delude ourselves. The road to peace is going to be a long androcky one. It would suffice to define the minimal terms for a real peace,in order to understand just how long that road will be: The establishmentof a Palestinian state on the entire territory of the West Bank and theGaza Strip, making Jerusalem the capital of both nations, transferring thesettlers back home.
Today, all of this seems like a fantasy. But 45 years ago, when we rosethe banner of Israeli-Palestinian peace, the possibility of a hand-shakebetween the leaders of the Likud and the PLO seemed far more of a fantasy.
The dynamic is working. It is inescapable. Peace, though it may tarry,will come.