EVERY citizen of the world should have a vested interest in the success of recent peace agreements in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Land-for-peace deals between the Middle East leaders represent the possible international triumph of peaceful negotiations over terrorism.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the Cabinet agreed to withdraw Jewish families from communities in the Gaza Strip and return the land to Palestinians after 38 years of Israeli occupation. Palestinians who declare victory in the reoccupation of this hotly contested land need to be reminded that the dedication to non-violent actions is the basis for Israeli disengagement, not Hamas militants or civilian attacks.
The death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat provoked this new wave of negotiations. With a Palestinian leader devoted to peace and coexistence (the newly elected Mahmoud Abbas), give-and-take agreements can function without resting on security or protective considerations, but rather on reconciliation and the conclusion of an embattled Middle East peace process.
Foreign diplomats are quick to note the Oslo Accords and other failed agreements during the former Bush and Clinton administrations. However, Sharon's plans are different because they focus on reciprocity, not unilateral sacrifices for peace. Abbas' mission to convince the Palestinian people to use beneficial, non-violent actions and to guarantee Israeli and world leaders peaceful withdrawals from Gaza is more important than any past hostility or treaty. Outside leaders, like Clinton and Ambassador Dennis Ross, have valiantly attempted to resolve the Middle East crisis, but the success inevitably stems from the non-violent nature of Palestinian citizens. Arafat's half-hearted attempts to suppress terrorist groups were not as effective as Abbas' legal restrictions, speaking tours and public condemnation of Hamas. For give-and-take land deals to materialize, the Palestinian people need to prove to Israel and the world that it can conduct negotiations without the threat of terrorism and violence -- Abbas can help the Palestinians achieve this goal.
The world, then, must ensure the success of this non-violent dedication. Peaceful negotiations can prevail over terrorism if the Israeli withdrawal is conducted without any violence and the Palestinians begin to create their own state. Public opinion needs to condemn any terrorist attacks and support Abbas, while Palestine and Israel enforce penalties on militant groups. Every nation should be interested in the success of this process for the sake of Israel's security and the prevention of terrorism, as well as for stability in the Middle East.
Granted, the whole process may unravel if Palestinians resort to violent terrorist acts and inspire a new Intifada, or uprising. Yet when faced with the decision to receive land with peace or cause strife with terrorism and lose international support, why don't all Palestinians choose the former? The majority of Palestinian citizens, according to Ross, were not content with Arafat's reign and threats of constant violence. The minority extremists, like Hamas, will continue to lose support if they assert unreasonable claims to violently take back Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state.
To rest on the burden placed on the Palestinians' peaceful intentions is not entirely fair. Israel needs to continue its dedication to disengagement and use caution when retaliating against Palestinian attacks. The gradual release of Palestinian prisoners and restraint from targeted attacks and assassinations are steps to ensure the reciprocity of peaceful negotiations. Also, although the security fence may protect Israelis from militant attacks, it is not an opportune time to declare borders in a developing peace process. The victory of a non-violent withdrawal will pave the way for future compromises with the Palestinian people, including the creation of official borders with a security fence, and garner international support.
Although some Israelis do not support the Gaza withdrawal, especially those citizens in the disengaged communities, Israel's strides to give land for peace represents the beginning of a 'different' peace process. There is peaceful leadership among Middle Eastern nations (i.e. Jordan and Egypt)that support the disengagement plans, a Bush administration that encourages peaceful coexistence, and bothPalestinian and Israeli polities that are growing weary of violence. Palestinian support for Abbas confirms the citizenry's desire to transition from Arafat's belligerence to peaceable and serene lives. It is time for the Middle East conflict to reach its conclusion -- the necessary ingredients are in place, and therefore the world should be active to ensure the success of the process and hold each side accountable. This test demonstrates to the world that terrorism can be overcome, not solely by American occupation, but by peaceful reciprocity and give-and-take compromises.
Michael Behr's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at mbehr@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 2 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 3 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
