John wrote: > Would it work on a larger scale? Locking up Arafat and Sharon together in a > kitchen and ask them to prepare a big meal for a combined family dinner in > private? > As a matter of fact, you know Ehud Barak had Arafat over at his home for dinner when he was pm. I'm afraid Arafat's values are too far apart and an agreement won't be reached this way with him.
Actually the reason in my opinion that the intifada resumed and that Arafat didn't agree to Barak's peace plan is that they construed Israel's pullout from Lebanon as a sign of weakness, as a sign that force and terrorism would make Israel bend and give more. When I think about it, what's more to give? I mean the west bank and Gaza are under autonomous rule already. The only thing left to give is the state, which would enable Palestinians to do everything as they see fit, including building up an army if they wish. This is where the line must be drawn because so far the leaders have always said (if you look) that they would accept a part of Palestine only as a stepping stone to reposess 100% of the territory. Anyway, I feel now would be the perfect time from the Israeli standpoint to make peace because they have demonstrated they won't bend to terrorism. So now they can make concessions (and they will soon in Washington) which won't be interpreted as a sign of weakness and only raise the other party's expectations. The only problem is Arafat may feel dishonored to make peace after taking a beating and the cycle of violence will resume. As Shimon Perez said, Israel is perfectly willing to give Palestinians what they want under peace and for which they are using violence. Laurent
