A long way from Riyadh to Rafah

[Violet_Crumble]

It's a bit of a jolt to realise that the Arab League has been discussing the Palestinian problem for more than 60 years. The first time it did so was in 1946, just a year after the league's creation, when the British-ruled mandated territory was about to be partitioned between Jews and Arabs - and it has been unable to come up with a workable solution since.
The league's 19th summit conference, which starts in Riyadh tomorrow, has generated much excitement that all could finally be about to change. Saudi Arabia is tabling a peace plan that will have the support of every single Arab country - the League has 22 members, including the Palestinians - and sets out their terms for ending 58 years of conflict with the Jewish state.

There are certainly some positive signs. Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, has given the initiative a cautious though conditional welcome. Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, made headlines in Jerusalem when he talked of convening a regional summit conference that could bring all the protagonists together for the first time in 15 years. Condi Rice, the US secretary of state, has even cajoled the Israeli and Palestinian leaders into holding regular meetings, though Olmert is refusing to deal formally with the Palestinian unity government.

Plans for peace between Israel and the Arabs are nothing new, though the only ones to have been implemented are the bilateral agreements between Israel and Egypt in 1979 and between Israel and Jordan in 1994. The 1993 Oslo accords between Israel and the PLO are in force on paper but moribund in reality.

The significance of the Saudi plan is that it is comprehensive, and would, if implemented, mean an end to what many consider the world's most intractable conflict.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2044055,00.html

[acmavm]

1. I wouldn't know what it was like not hearing about Palestinian/Israeli

problems, they've just been a part of the news my whole life. Wouldn't that be a great thing if they could find a way to settle their differences (for the most part) and not always resort to violence every time something happened?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

2. I really liked comments I heard today from Robert Malley

on "All things considered" today.

I thought he had an optimistic, reasonable take on the situation and on the Palestinian unity government, which represents the greatest concensus ever in Palestine on the goals and means of peace.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9163094

[Bragi]

3. Will extremists scuttle any resolution again?

I'm no expert on this, but it seems to me that every time anyone comes up with anything resembling a workable resolution of the conflict, that extremists on both sides manage to scuttle the exercise.

Once anything settlement-minded occurs, all it usually takes is for one of the outrider Palestinian groups to hurl an off-target errant missile or bomb somewhere into Israel. This will inevitably and quickly followed by the Israeli army bull-dozing of a few towns, or invading or bombing a neighbouring state, or whatever, and the peace effort will once again be toast.

Will it happen again?

- B

[breakaleg]

4. As someone pointed out in another thread, this kind of thing happened in South Africa as well.

Except there, negotiating parties on both sides refused to let the extremists have their way and negotiated all though the violence. Perhaps there is a lesson there than Israel/Palestinians can learn from.

[Bragi]

5. Indeed...

I can't think of a single instance in which a refusal to negotiate because of violence lead to either a cessation of violence, or a settlement.