Oslo the way to peace?

national | miscellaneous | news report Saturday May 04, 2002 03:16 by Ken Davids - Media analyst

Detail on the farce of Oslo!

There’s been much spilled ink lately about Oslo. The current hostilities have been dubbed the “Oslo War”. Many advocate open renunciation of the Oslo accords. Being curious, and having a fast internet connection, I did some research.

Let’s begin, totally at random, with Article XV of the 1993 Oslo Accords, officially called the Declaration of Principles. I’ll quote it in full:

-----
Article XV

RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Declaration of Principles, or any subsequent agreements pertaining to the interim period, shall be resolved by negotiations through the Joint Liaison Committee to be established pursuant to Article X above.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be resolved by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed upon by the parties.

3. The parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both parties, the parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
-----

That’s Article XV. Strange, I’ve read Article XV over and over, but I can’t find any references to rocks, riots, intifadas, suicide bombers, Kassam rockets, snipers, murder or lynching. Maybe it’s elsewhere. So I loaded the whole document into my word processor and did a search. Hmmm. “Suicide Bomber” never came up. Not even once. Neither did any of those other terms.

This means two things: 1. Israel never agreed to the use of terror to settle disputes, and 2. the Palestinians have breached the agreement. Obvious? But wait. It’s not so simple. The entire world seems to have missed this point.

Let’s go on. Not much of interest in the 1995 Interim Agreement. It’s mostly about elections, judicial processes, things that we in civilized countries take for granted and are probably superfluous in… oh wait, here’s something - Article XIV, paragraph 4. It says:

"Except for the arms, ammunition and equipment of the Palestinian Police described in Annex I, and those of the Israeli military forces, no organization, group or individual in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip shall manufacture, sell, acquire, possess, import or otherwise introduce into the West Bank or the Gaza Strip any firearms, ammunition, weapons, explosives, gunpowder or any related equipment, unless otherwise provided for in Annex I"

You can look it up or you can trust me. Annex I provides an overly liberal allowance for civilian pistols, but no nail studded bombs, rockets or grenades. Another breach? And here’s my favourite, Article XV titled “Prevention of Hostile Acts” (You’re not skeptical already, are you?):

"Both sides shall take all measures necessary in order to prevent acts of terrorism, crime and hostilities directed against each other, against individuals falling under the other´s authority and against their property and shall take legal measures against offenders."

Words fail me.

The other side of these agreements is all the positive developments that are supposed to happen to create peace between the parties. In the original Oslo document, the word “cooperation” occurs 43 times.

Now, I must admit that I’m puzzled. A lot of Israelis don’t like the Oslo agreements. I don’t like the Oslo agreements. Yet that’s of no consequence. Many Israelis, particularly those on the political left, did (do?) like the deal. Even those on the right who express open disdain for it have committed themselves to living up to its provisions. Former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanuyahu did not abrogate the agreement. Neither did current Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, notwithstanding his reputation in the media as a “hard liner.” I believe that, objectively speaking, Israel did what it could to fulfill its obligations under the agreement. Israel also did what it could to negotiate disputed provisions, even under the “hawkish” Netanyahu.

Given the developments over the last two years, I think it might be an understatement to say that the Palestinians also do not like this agreement. However, I haven’t seen any evidence of a left - right dispute among them. One can say this about the Palestinians, at least they’re united. What I can’t understand though, is what made them sign it if it’s so repugnant to them (It couldn’t have been a cynical move to weaken Israel, could it? That would mean that those in Israel who signed must have been pretty naive.). Here’s the key: We don’t know what their beef is. They’ve never said what part of the Oslo agreement hasn’t been fulfilled to their satisfaction. They’ve never submitted a formal request for negotiation or arbitration pursuant to the original Article XV. They do vaguely complain about “the Occupier”, but that was the concern that Oslo was meant to address. So what is going on here?

It is significant, however, that the Palestinians have used all of the advantages they’ve been afforded as a result of the implementation of Oslo to launch a terror campaign against Israel. I suppose it would be cynical of me to suggest that this was their plan all along. But then, I’m a pretty cynical guy.

Now we have the so-called “Saudi peace initiative.” Instead of an agreement between those who murder women and children, we are being asked to consider a new agreement advanced by those that sponsor those who murder women and children, and who accuse Jews of baking Purim biscuits and matza with human blood (and who, by the way, called former New York Mayor Rudy Guiliani a “homosexual Jew” when he turned down their $10,000,000). Aside from the obvious problem here, I have to wonder why Israel would even consider more agreements given the obvious worthlessness of the one already signed and implemented. Then, there are those who hold demonstrations, and complain about Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people. They’ve also forgotten about this agreement called “Oslo” (surprisingly, since they were the ones behind it).

I must be missing something here. Nothing that anybody is saying about the prospects for peace between Israel and the Palestinians makes any sense. Everyone talks about the wisdom of Oslo, or lack thereof. Nobody is talking about the implications of its failure as an agreement. Shouldn’t that be a concern?