"The Geneva Accord offers the U.S. the vehicle with which to negotiate this peace. The signing of the accord, a plan compatible with the U.S.-envisioned Roadmap, deserves support. Its strength lies in its outline of an endgame rather than a "staged" solution. The accord addresses the difficult issues: control of holy sites in Jerusalem, the right of return for Palestinians, and Israeli settlements on the West Bank. Its two-state solution is key to its probability for success.
"By sidestepping the Oslo Accords disastrous "staged" solution, the opposition in both populations are prevented from sabotaging the peace process. The Geneva Accord bypasses these vulnerabilities and simultaneously provides an incentive for both parties to take the initiative in making difficult concessions.
"At this juncture, the U.S. must mobilize current momentum as it did after the end of the Gulf War in 1991 when it cajoled Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir to meet officially with Palestinians for the first time. Shamir also participated in the first bilateral talks with countries such as Syria at the Madrid Conference. The U.S. took a firm stand in bringing these negotiations to fruition.
"When the U.S. threatened to withdraw loans because of continued Israeli settlements in defiance of initial agreements, Shamir refused to halt the settlements. The Israeli public responded by electing in his stead Yitzhak Rabin, who signed the Oslo Accords. The Oslo process broke down after Rabin's murder because the staged process enabled opposing factions to mobilize distrust in both populations and because leaders on both sides failed to defy these spoilers successfully.
"Must individual leaders be replaced again before negotiations can be revitalized? The Bush Administration cannot afford to wait for either Arafat or Sharon to be replaced. It must create conditions for further compromise.
"If Yitzhak Shamir -- an ideologue of the most extreme versions of revisionist Zionism -- was successfully persuaded to attend the Madrid conference, Ariel Sharon, more pragmatic than Shamir ever was, can be pushed even harder. The Palestinian Authority must also be pressed harder to end violence against Israel including ending incitement and capturing of weapons. Israel should be pressured with greater force to stop increasing settlements and building its fence and to use more restraint in response to terrorism.
"However, none of these can be preconditions for negotiating a final resolution. Even if there are increased measures of good faith, absolute security can never be guaranteed.
"Does the fence currently under construction offer a real solution in Israel? Jabotinksy, the architect of the revisionist ideology that frames today's Likud party, believed an Iron Wall would "wall off" the enemy so that security would be provided without the necessity of compromise. However, the fence that is being built today has already failed to provide security in the areas where it is completed. Fences built on agreed-upon borders may make for good neighbors, but those built on contended land do not. Once a mutually agreed upon border satisfies the majority in both populations, iron walls become unnecessary. Perhaps this time will come soon.
