When the intifada had been virtually wiped out, and Arafat was on the ropes following the 1991 Gulf War, Israel resuscitated the failing terror leader and installed him as its "partner for peace" and head of a state-in-the-making.

While Sharon was an eloquent opponent of this suicidal course at the time, now that he has finally broken with the policy of "restraint" -- which has been Israel's hallmark since Oslo -- to administer serious blows to the Palestinian Terror Authority, he too seems eager to undo his achievements on the ground. On April 8, in an address to the Knesset announcing Operation Defensive Shield, Sharon did something wholly inexplicable.

He declared that Saudi Prince Abdullah's "peace initiative" had a "positive component" although "the details must be negotiated between the parties themselves." Sharon continued: "I take this opportunity to reiterate my proposal to meet immediately with moderate and responsible leaders in the Middle East. I am willing to go anywhere, without any pre-conditions from any party, to discuss peace. The United States can and should be a leading and driving force behind such an initiative, just as it spearheaded the negotiations leading to the convening of the Madrid Peace Conference over a decade ago." Sharon held up Israel's peace agreement with Egypt as a model -- a ceasefire followed by interim agreements and then a peace agreement which, said Sharon, "has been sustained because it was predicated on the solid foundations of peace alongside painful concessions."

Has Sharon joined Peres in going through the looking glass? The Madrid Peace Conference was a catastrophe, paving the way for the Oslo "breakthrough." Prince Abdullah's "peace initiative" proposes recognizing Israel if it agrees to commit suicide, i.e. return to the 1949 borders and accept the "right of return" of Arab refugees. This is the Arafat "peace" plan and points up the need for Israel to insist on preconditions in any negotiations, i.e. that Arabs accept the principle that repatriation of refugees will be in Arab countries.

And Egypt a model? In an article entitled "Not a Cold Peace -- A Cold War" (Makor Rishon, August 17, 2001) Carolyn Glick quotes Dan Eldar, a former chief of Israel's Mossad: "The Egyptians never carried out their part of the deal -- normalization of relations with us. Our relationship with them over the years has been limited to a cease-fire agreement ... At the same time they are upgrading their military capabilities with alarming rapidity and success. Israel's peace with Egypt is so cold that the transition from it to a state of war would be seamless, very fast and little noticed." And for this "peace," Israel forfeited every inch of territory claimed by Egypt. This is precisely the model the Arab states have in mind: Israeli retreat to the borders of 1949 in exchange for continued hatred, incitement, and the buildup to all-out war.

What does Sharon think would transpire at his proposed regional "peace conference?" How could it be anything but a grand opportunity for the participants -- the world media in attendance -- to virulently attack Israel? If a regional peace conference is a good idea, would not an international conference be even better? Russia's Vladimir Putin as well as representatives of the European Union have already announced their eagerness to participate in such a hate-Israel parley. Whatever the makeup of the conference, Israel would find no champions. The United States, according to a report in The Forward (April 2), would be pushing for early establishment of a Palestinian state and a permanent status agreement based on the framework of the Saudi initiative. In other words, Israel would be expected to create a Palestinian state as a confidence-building "interim" measure, while putting off into the future a "permanent" agreement couched in terms of the Saudi plan, i.e. the U.S. would expect Israel to give legitimacy to the long range target of its own demise.

Can one imagine the triumph of Arafat, so recently penned up in Ramallah, now once again the celebrated victim/victor over Israel, at any such "peace conference"?

There has been speculation that Sharon was not serious in making his proposal for a peace conference: that it was a ploy to distract the Americans and satisfy the Labor members of his coalition while he focused on attacking the terrorist infrastructure. But if so, it is a seriously bad idea to advance a proposal you hope will come to naught. A genie, once out of a bottle, is notoriously difficult to put back in. Perhaps Sharon thought that by refusing to permit Arafat to attend he would scuttle the conference, since other Arab leaders would then refuse to participate. But Sharon soon waffled on that score and Peres announced that of course Arafat could attend since every people is entitled to choose its own representatives.

Can one imagine the triumph of Arafat, so recently penned up in Ramallah, now once again the celebrated victim/victor over Israel, at any such "peace conference"? Secretary of State Powell already has announced a backup plan in case Israel balks over Arafat: a conference of Foreign Ministers. In that event, the Palestinian Authority will have two representatives -- Arafat's

May 2002               - 3 -               Outpost