With a renewed focus in Washington on Middle East peace, many in the US capital have re-ignited the longstanding debate as to which track of the Israel-Arab peace process has greater promise: the Palestinian track or the Syrian and Lebanese tracks. Although there is no such thing as low-hanging fruit in this quest, and it is easy to be tempted into thinking that each new chapter signifies a watershed or a crisis, the Obama administration is conducting the current peacemaking efforts prudently. While a holistic approach to Middle East peace is important - indeed, crucial - it is worth considering whether there is greater potential for progress on the Syria and Lebanon tracks than with the Palestinians.
Many dynamics have markedly changed in the years since the United States last seriously focused on the Israel-Arab peace process. To name but a few: There is a substantial US military presence in the region; most of the Gulf countries, Jordan and Egypt share the same threat perception as Israel (a well-justified fear of Iran); Syrian suzerainty over Lebanon has been substantially diminished; Iraq has been altered radically; the Palestinians waged a second intifada and failed; Hamas' de facto control over Gaza has been formalized; and there has been slow progress - but progress nonetheless - on democratization. These dynamics define the strategic context in which the latest effort to reach Middle East peace is being pursued.
The key issues under consideration on the Israeli-Palestinian track - security, refugees, Jerusalem and settlements - remain visceral in a way that the Golan Heights is not. The integrated nature of Israeli and Palestinian operating space makes this track extremely complex, as daily friction between Israelis and Palestinians creates numerous obstacles and setbacks that are difficult to overcome. Furthermore, the lack of a legitimate Palestinian state and broadly functioning state institutions, and a fragile Palestinian Authority leadership, make this track infinitely harder because it is less likely that a pseudo-state can deliver on its promises.
On the Syrian front, the common threat perception throughout the region about the dangers of Iranian ambitions coupled with the latest opening to Damascus by key Arab states provide an opportunity for Syria to slowly move away from Iran and its terrorist allies should Damascus wish to do so. This possibility is fueled by the fact that Tehran, not Damascus, has the upper hand with groups like Hizbullah, making it easier for the Syrians to distance themselves from groups whose livelihood does not depend on it. The simultaneous US opening to Syria and Iran may deepen uncertainties in Tehran and Damascus regarding one another's willingness to choose a different path.
Syria's adherence to the letter (though less so the spirit) of the 1974 ceasefire agreement is an important data point, and the recent Syria-Israel negotiations mediated by the Turks indicate Syria's willingness to explore this track after nearly a decade's hiatus. To be sure, a posture change on the part of Damascus will be challenging. But it is by no means inconceivable.
While the Israel-Lebanon peace process is always seen within the paradigm of Syria-Lebanon, it is worthwhile to pursue a two-pronged approach since Syria should no longer have a veto over Lebanon-Israel talks. Furthermore, save for Hizbullah - wherein Iranian assistance will be critical - the points of contention between Lebanon and Israel are actually not that difficult to reconcile. The debate over land is minimal and it is doubtful that the Lebanese government would use its security apparatus against Israel. Quite the contrary, a stronger Lebanese state would in practice facilitate peace with Israel.
In fact, the parties have been indirectly discussing key security issues with United Nations mediation for years. While Lebanon's upcoming elections may inhibit the ability of the government in Beirut to positively engage in peace negotiations, they would not alter the underlying strategic dynamic between Lebanon and Israel - one that could be conducive to peace.
From the Israeli perspective, too, the Syria-Lebanon track more likely has greater potential. In his previous stint as prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu spent substantial time on Syria, offering Damascus a better deal than his successors; his re-engagement on this track is likely. Similarly, Defense Minister Ehud Barak redeployed Israeli troops from Lebanon during his tenure as prime minister in 2000. Both had palpable failures on the Palestinian track. Particularly given the relatively young governments in Jerusalem and Washington, the Israelis now have an opportunity to signal their willingness to engage with the Arabs via confidence-building measures on the path to comprehensive peace.
Substantial progress on the Middle East peace process can be made, particularly if key states like Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia continue playing a constructive role. While there are game-changers that could severely influence this latest effort, primarily Iran's nuclear program, no one should be dissuaded by arguments that anything short of complete success isn't worth it. Admittedly, any agreement will take years to implement - a process that could be more difficult than penning actual agreements. Yet movement a few steps closer to regional peace, which the Syria-Lebanon track may provide, would help set the stage for comprehensive peace.
Mara E. Karlin served as the Pentagon's Levant director. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-international.org, an online newsletter that publishes views on Middle Eastern and Islamic affairs.
Printable Version Send to a friend Listen to the Article
Your feedback is important to us! We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Click here NOW to Comment on this Article
More Opinion Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . »The value of a pale blue dot this Year of Astronomy »Washington makes a sensible turnaround »Towards Muslim-Christian understanding »Pelosi is shading the truth on her knowledge of CIA torture »The United States will recover, but in a somewhat de-globalized world »Palestinian security forces must aspire to serving the state »Tacking global warming is proving a low-priority problem »Dictatorship, Tunisia's undeserved fate »Remember those toxic assets? They're mostly still around »For Pakistanis, what is 'Islamic law'? »America shouldn't drop democracy promotion, just reconsider it »Is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad really just a 'self-hating Jew'? More Books about the Middle-East conflict
Privacy Policy | Anti-Spamming Policy | Copyright Policy | Jobs@Daily Star
Copyright © 2009, The Daily Star. All rights reserved. Click here to contact our syndication department for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material. Contact the Online editor to report any problems with the site or to send your comments and suggestions. var sc_project=731379; var sc_invisible=1; var sc_partition=6; var sc_security="3de32f75"; LEBANON NEWS Politics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .» Cabinet to resolve all pending issues next week, ministerial source says» Israeli missile from 2006 war found in Nabatieh» Vice-President Biden to arrive in Beirut FridayBusiness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .» Lebanon's software piracy rate at 74 percent in 2008, 36th highest globally and 5th in MENA region» Bader selects French firm for first $1 million investment initiative» Beirut markets see calm after week-long surge in trading -- More Lebanon News -- 18 _uacct = "UA-360006-1"; urchinTracker();
Your feedback is important to us! We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Click here NOW to Comment on this Article
Privacy Policy | Anti-Spamming Policy | Copyright Policy | Jobs@Daily Star
Read Full Article »