For the Palestinians, the settlements are a red line; any compromise on full withdrawal is to them unacceptable. Unfortunately, the fact that international law is on their side (indeed, Israel's extensive destruction and seizure of Palestinian property is a "grave breach" of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and can thus be considered a war crime) is less germane to the immediate talks than that Washington and Tel Aviv have all the power and can call the shots. Sharon is unwilling even to freeze new settlements, insisting first that all the "violence" (only Palestinian violence, of course) must stop, followed by a lengthy "cooling-off period" and "confidence-building measures," i.e., renewal of security cooperation that would involve the PA's arrest of anyone Israel considers a threat. But the Palestinians know that seven years of such cooperation and confidence-building have only solidified the Israeli occupation and impoverished them further. Everyone I talked to roundly rejected a resumption of what they consider a sham peace process. The only Palestinians invested in Oslo, in fact, are Arafat and his PA yes men. But they know full well that any attempt to re-establish their role as Israel's gendarme--the minimum demand of the Sharon/Peres government--will meet with overwhelming rejection by the population, certainly if it's not accompanied by a substantive Israeli counteroffer, which Sharon has so far been unwilling to give.

During my visit, I didn't see much evidence of constructive new strategies of resistance. Between the despair of suicide bombings and the veiled capitulation of the Oslo process is a vast area of opportunity yet to be seized. No consistent effort has been made to engage the majority of Palestinians in this intifada--kids throwing stones at checkpoints and poorly disciplined fighters shooting at settlements and bypass roads (especially irresponsible is the firing from heavily populated areas, where the Israeli response with excessive force has been frighteningly destructive) are no substitute for a coordinated mass movement. For example, peaceful demonstrations and marches against the closures and settlements could inspire the world community and bring new allies to the cause, but such efforts have been tried only sporadically.

Sharon himself has not been able to overcome his bloody past. A June 17 BBC documentary on his role in and responsibility for the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre in Beirut, in which 1,000-3,000 Palestinian civilians were butchered by Israel's Phalangist allies while under close Israeli army supervision, has caused an uproar in Europe (Nation contributor and editorial board member Richard Falk, who was interviewed for the show as an expert on human rights law and gave credence to the war crimes allegations against Sharon, has received anonymous death threats as a result and is now under police protection). Sharon, the architect of the Lebanon war and Israel's defense minister at the time, was condemned by an Israeli commission of inquiry in 1983, which said he "bears personal responsibility" for the massacre.

The day after the BBC documentary aired, a Belgian court, responding to a complaint filed on behalf of twenty-eight plaintiffs and witnesses charging Sharon and others with war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, opened an official judicial investigation. (Recent Belgian legislation allows for criminal investigations even of heads of state for such crimes.) And Human Rights Watch, in a statement released on June 23, also urged a criminal investigation into Sharon's role in the killings. The organization said that "as Defense Minister, Ariel Sharon had overall responsibility over the Israeli Defense Forces and allowed Phalangist militias to enter the camps and terrorize the residents for three days." It's unclear how all this will affect the latest geopolitical maneuvering; it will probably damage Israel's attempt to curry favor with European heads of state and may even correct the US media's memory lapse vis-à-vis Sharon's past.

The latest signs from the region are ominous. After the recent killing of a settler near Hebron, Israel carried out a scorched-earth campaign, demolishing dozens of houses and wells, destroying fields and expelling hundreds of occupants. This was followed by the demolition of dozens of homes in the Jerusalem-area refugee camp of Shuafat and in southern Gaza. For its part, Hamas has vowed revenge and more suicide bombings in response to the Israeli army killing of an 11-year-old boy in Gaza. Some members of the Israeli Cabinet, along with much of the press and army high command, have for a while now been clamoring for a major invasion of PA-controlled areas and wholesale liquidation of "terrorists" and the PA itself--perhaps even accompanied by a partial "transfer," i.e., expulsion, of the Palestinian population. As veteran journalist Uzi Benziman put it in Israel's leading daily, Ha'aretz, on July 8, "The coming war is a matter of destiny, an inevitable development, whose outbreak depends only on the timing of the next terror attack and the number of resulting casualties."

Given Palestinian determination to resist, this could result in a bloodbath and thereby set the entire region aflame. It's not out of the question that demonstrations could topple unpopular regimes in Jordan, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. Surely Colin Powell and his advisers are aware of these dangers. They seem to have no coherent strategy, however, for coping with them. The tinderbox is awaiting a match.

• « Previous
• 1
• 2

• Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week!
• If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation.