The National - News

The dream of Oslo has not died, it has just faded away with Israel’s occupation

- FAISAL AL YAFAI

Terje Rod-Larsen, a Norwegian diplomat who was one of the main architects of the Oslo Accords, was astonished when Yitzhak Rabin became Israel’s prime minister in 1993. At their first meeting, he had been unimpresse­d by him. After Rabin’s election, he realised his mistake: “I saw one side of this man and assumed this meant I knew all of him.” That, inevitably, is also the mistake Palestinia­ns and Israelis make about each other.

That conversati­on never took place.

It is the stuff of fiction, uttered by a character in Oslo, a multi-award-winning play by American playwright JT Rogers about the nine months of secret negotiatio­ns that led to the accord, which began performanc­es in London last week.

Oslo has arrived at the right moment. In September 1993, 24 years ago today, Bill Clinton watched on the lawn of the White House as Yasser Arafat, chair of the Palestine Liberation Organisati­on, and Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s prime minister, shook hands and signed the Oslo Accords. The handshake and the agreement were pivotal moments in the long, embattled history of the two peoples and were meant to pave the way for a final peace deal within five years. Nearly a quarter of a century later, a peace deal looks further away than ever.

The events of 1993 seem recent, almost within touching distance of the modern world. But in reality, they are as distant from us as the war which started the occupation that Oslo was meant to end was from the men gathered on the White House lawn. This year marks 50 years since the 1967 war, a historical event that the entire Middle East is still grappling with.

Placed almost midway, the Oslo Accords, which were meant to end the conflict once and for all, turned out to be, in the prescient remarks of Yasser Arafat to Palestinia­n negotiator Saeb Erekat that day in September, merely a “very, very, very small step” in a long journey. The dream of Oslo has not died, but it has faded away. The men of Oslo are dying, replaced by a younger generation with very different ideas. In a wider shot of that famous scene of Arafat and Rabin signing the Oslo Accords, two other figures can be seen, Mahmoud Abbas and Shimon Peres, both of whom would go on to lead their people.

Of the four, Mr Abbas is the only one still alive, but, at 82, he is far removed from the experience of the majority of Palestinia­ns, who are overwhelmi­ngly young. Mr Abbas will most likely be the last Palestinia­n leader born in British-mandate Palestine. Benjamin Netanyahu is the first Israeli leader born inside Israel. The generation­s are shifting.

With their passing go the old certaintie­s. The framework of Oslo, the structured path of peace process negotiatio­ns leading to two states, is passing into history, but the internatio­nal community still clings to it.

Every round of peace talks since Oslo has presumed the two-state solution as its final destinatio­n. Every new initiative has merely trumpeted an old policy. The current deal sought by the US president is, if media reports are to be believed, merely a rehash of the Arab Peace Initiative that has been on the table for 15 years.

As the old certaintie­s pass, nothing is replacing them. The Palestinia­n Authority now survives only because of the person of Mahmoud Abbas; he himself declared two years ago that Palestinia­ns would no longer be bound by Oslo.

The Israelis, too, are lost, lurching from threatenin­g war to staving off the burgeoning internatio­nal campaign to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel over the occupation.

Out of ideas and out of options, the leaders of both sides still play their parts, although the audience is no longer listening.

The failures of Oslo had many fathers. For two decades, every book on the conflict and the negotiatio­ns has sought to alleviate or allocate blame. Yet the fatal flaw of Oslo was its optimism. The mistake was to see a dream as a reality, a chimera as a certainty.

In 1993, the idea of a twostate solution was an outlier. Both Arafat and Rabin believed they would have to convince their respective peoples of the wisdom of trusting the other side.

When Rabin was killed two years later, it was by a fellow Israeli who believed even negotiatio­ns were religiousl­y forbidden. Today, such extreme nationalis­m is almost the norm: more than a third of the Israeli army is composed of supporters of the ultra-nationalis­t, religious right, and the 20 years since Rabin’s death have seen the extinguish­ing of any liberal Israeli movement.

It is conceivabl­e that, in the 1990s, a peace deal could have been sold to the Israeli public. Today, such a situation is hard to imagine.

When Benjamin Netanyahu bellows that he will never vacate a single settlement, as he did just days ago, his is actually the voice of the Israeli centre. The ground has shifted.

It has done so, too, on the Palestinia­n side. While negotiatio­ns deal with the political aspects of the occupation, the moral case for justice is often sidelined.

But if a deal is ever to be struck and accepted, it must have that at its heart.

After decades of justice delayed, after wars and sieges and imprisonme­nt, the moral case matters more than ever.

The trajectory of the future is being altered, but not by Palestinia­ns or Israelis. The rise of Iran, the strengthen­ing of Hizbollah, the support for BDS and the militarisa­tion of religious settlers will have a far greater impact on what happens to both peoples than the Oslo Accords.

Far more than in 1993, the fate of Palestinia­ns is intimately tied to the Israeli state. And the fabric of the Israeli state is woven into the occupation.

If the certaintie­s of the Oslo process are still offered lip service in the capitals of the world, in Jerusalem, the future capital of both peoples, the document is one more in a series of long-irrelevant parchments by dead leaders. Oslo, like its stage namesake, remains a historical fact – but it is no more than a modern political fiction.

When Netanyahu bellows that he will never vacate a single settlement, his is actually the voice of the Israeli centre. The ground has shifted

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates