Israel Palestine Infos
Uri Avnery
January 1, 2011
Interim Forever!
“I HAVE three answers,”
the Jew told the rabbi when his neighbor sued him for not returning a borrowed
jar.
“First, I never borrowed
a jar from him. Second, the jar was broken. Third, I returned it to him long
ago.”
Avigdor Lieberman’s Peace
Plan shows a similar kind of logic.
PEACE PLAN? Lieberman? Oh
yes. Contrary to everything you thought, Lieberman wants peace, indeed is
yearning for peace. So much so that he has spent days and nights working out an
entire Peace Plan of his own.
This week he summoned
But first of all,
Lieberman settled accounts with the Turks. They demand an apology from
“There is no limit to
their Chutzpah,” Lieberman thundered. Everybody knows that the Turks themselves
attacked our soldiers who abseiled innocently from their helicopters and were
compelled to shoot in self-defense.
Lieberman knew, of
course, that Netanyahu was negotiating with the Turks in order to put an end to
the conflict. The Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, and the army chiefs were
putting pressure on him to reestablish good relations with
Lieberman has put an end
to this appeasement. Netanyahu cannot afford to look like a wimp next to his
macho Foreign Minister. So he declared that he would never ever apologize.
For Lieberman, that was a
major victory. Netanyahu capitulated. Barak was humiliated. The Turks remain
enemies. What more can a Foreign Minister hope for?
BUT LIEBERMAN does not
rest on his laurels for a moment. At the same meeting with the select 170 he
laid out his great plan, Plan B.
Just a moment. If this is
Plan B, what is Plan A?
Netanyahu, of course, has
no peace plan. His declared position is that the Palestinians must return to
direct negotiations without prior conditions, but only after they officially
recognize Israel as “the state of the Jewish people” (or, in another version, as
a “Jewish and democratic state”.) It is clear that the Palestinians cannot be
expected to agree to any such prior condition.
So what “Plan A” does
Lieberman allude to? Not to Netanyahu’s, but to Barack Obama’s. The American
president speaks about two states with the border between them based on the 1967
lines and a Palestinian capital in
On no account, says
Lieberman. And, like the Jew who was sued for the jar, he also has his three
reasons:
First, we have no partner
for peace.
Second, the Israeli
government cannot make peace.
Third, peace is no good
for us.
WE HAVE no partner for
peace, because the Palestinians don’t want peace. Lieberman, the immigrant from
Moldavia, knows the Palestinians much better than they know themselves.
Therefore he states categorically: “Even if we offer the Palestinians Tel Aviv
and a withdrawal to the 1947 borders, they will find a reason not to sign a
peace treaty.” (The 1947 borders, fixed by the United Nations, gave
True, this matter could
be settled easily:
Lieberman, so it seems,
did not overlook such a possibility, and so he has prepared an alternative
argument: we cannot negotiate with the Palestinians because they have no
legitimate leadership.
Why not legitimate? Here
Lieberman is revealed as the principled democrat he is. Mahmoud Abbas’ term of
office has expired. The Palestinian Authority has held no new elections. Can one
demand of
Clearly, that is
unthinkable.
True, the great majority
of the Palestinian people agree that Abbas should conduct the negotiations. Even
Hamas recently declared (not for the first time) that if Abbas reaches a peace
agreement, and if this is confirmed by the Palestinian people in a referendum,
Hamas would accept it, even though this would be contrary to its principles.
But this does not
interest Lieberman. He will not compromise himself by negotiating with an
administration whose democratic credentials are in doubt.
THIS IS NOT so important,
because, according to
Quite simply, “there are
sharp differences of opinion within the coalition”. As he puts it: “I don’t
think that it is possible to achieve a common denominator between Eli Yishai and
Ehud Barak, or between me and Dan Meridor, or even in Likud between Benny Begin
and Michael Eitan (Meridor, Begin and Eitan are all ministers without
portfolio)…In the present political circumstances, it is impossible for us to
present a plan for a permanent settlement, because the coalition would simply
not survive.”
For Lieberman, as for
Netanyahu, the continued existence of the present coalition is clearly more
important than reaching a “permanent settlement”. True, one could easily set up
an alternative coalition, based on Likud, Kadima and Labor, but for Lieberman –
and, so it seems, for Netanyahu, too – this possibility is not worth
considering.
THE CONCLUSION, according
to Lieberman: peace is not possible, not now, not for the coming decades.
But, fortunately, he has
an alternative that is much better than a final peace agreement.
It is called “Long-Term
Interim Agreement”.
This week, Lieberman
leaked its basics: “A significant increase in cooperation with the Palestinian
Authority in the areas of security and the economy…The aim of the Plan is to
stabilize even more the situation in the West Bank and increase the security
cooperation with the Palestinian Authority in order to give the Palestinians
more security responsibilities for what’s happening on the ground.”
So, it is possible after
all to cooperate with the illegitimate regime of Mahmoud Abbas, if he continues
to collaborate with the
Meaning: in payment for
the services of the Palestinian Authority for
The Plan also fixes
targets: the Palestinian GNP pro capita must reach about 20 thousand
dollars (more than ten times its present level). “When the economic situation
within the Palestinian Authority is similar to that in
In other words: the
occupation will continue until one of the following happens: either the
Palestinian standard of living will reach that of
IS THIS the plan of
Lieberman only, or of Netanyahu, too?
When asked about the
speech of his Foreign Minister, Netanyahu gave an evasive answer. Any minister
has the right to say whatever he wants, he said, but only the government’s
official policy counts.
Well, first of all, the
Foreign Minister is not just “any minister”. The political musings of the deputy
Minister of Transportation (if any) may be unimportant, but the Foreign Minister
is the international spokesman of the state, the representative of the
government abroad.
But Netanyahu continued
that if negotiations are resumed and these come up against a brick wall, it is
very possible that there will be no choice but to conclude an interim agreement.
In practice, it is
Netanyahu himself who is holding up the negotiations, because he refuses to
freeze the settlements and he demands that the Palestinians recognize
So what remains? Interim
forever!