News Analysis: Peace Talks Get New Lease on Life, but May Die Without Quick Progress

Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s recent trip to the Middle East has reinvigorated the peace process, but the sense here is that more progress needs to be made quickly for the talks to succeed.

Word that the next round of bilateral peace talks may resume here within a few weeks demonstrates that Christopher’s journey to the tumultuous region last week met its goal of focusing Middle East leaders’ attention on the troubled negotiations.

The recent fighting between Israel and pro-Iranian Hezbollah militia in southern Lebanon, and the well-publicized disagreements among Palestinian leaders in Tunis and the administered territories led some here to believe that the peace process, already on shaky ground, could become completely derailed.

But with the fighting halted and the threatened resignations of leading Palestinian negotiators now withdrawn, observers are hoping the talks will make substantive progress within the next few months.

Reports from the region and from the pro-Israel community here said the bilateral talks Israel is conducting separately with Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the Palestinians are set to resume in Washington around Aug. 31.

State Department spokesman Mike McCurry said Wednesday that while no date had yet been set, late August or early September was the time frame under discussion.

Christopher and other administration officials have said that if real progress is not forthcoming by the end of 1993 — now only a few months away — the United States will lessen its participation in the peace process.

In a breakfast meeting with members of the American Jewish press here Wednesday, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Yossi Beilin said progress in the talks should be framed in terms of “months and not years.”

If the high-level American shuttles, and the talks here in Washington continue, “we may have solutions in the coming months,” Beilin said, striking an optimistic tone.

SYRIAN TRACK ‘MOST PROMISING’

Observers here are saying that the Israeli-Syrian talks are the ones with the most potential momentum, and that progress on that track could create an impetus for other tracks.

“The focus needs to stay on the Israeli-Syrian track,” said Richard Haass, a former Middle East specialist in the Bush administration and now a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment.

That track is “the most promising,” Haass said, “and may help pull along the Palestinian track.”

Beilin, for his part, said that while it is “tempting to have separate peace agreements with the others,” it is important to reach “some kind of beginning with the Palestinians.”

Throughout the last several rounds of talks here, the Israeli-Syrian track has been stalled over definitions of terms.

The Israelis have been waiting for the Syrians to define what they mean by a “full peace” with Israel, and the Syrians are waiting for the Israelis to define what they mean by “withdrawal” from the Golan Heights.

Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, said Wednesday that for the success of the peace process, “a lot depends on credibility,” in particular the credibility of Syria.

“For Israel to give up tangibles for intangibles, they have to have credible partners,” he said.

In order to achieve progress in the peace process, the U.S. government must pressure Syrian President Hafez Assad to choose between working with the United States and supporting Iran, one expert said this week.

It’s up to the United States to “put real pressure on Assad to ante up,” said Daniel Pipes of the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia.

One expert suggested this week that the fallout from the recent Israeli action in Lebanon, dubbed “Operation Accountability,” could actually pave the way for a new momentum in dealing with the thorny issue of control over southern Lebanon, another question concerning both Israel and Syria.

Operation Accountability made Assad “the accountable address” for actions in southern Lebanon, said Mark Rosenblum, political director for Americans for Peace Now. “A veil has been dropped,” he said.

As a result of Syria’s role in reining in Hezbollah fighters, southern Lebanon, instead of the Golan Heights, could well become the starting point for progress in the Israeli-Syrian talks, Rosenblum said.

PALESTINIAN TRACK LOOKS BLEAKER

While there are hopes for progress in the Syrian talks, the picture is bleaker as far as the Palestinians are concerned.

The issue of eastern Jerusalem, which the Palestinians want to discuss at this stage of the talks and the Israelis do not, is still a major roadblock.

And the split between Palestinian negotiators in the territories and the Palestine Liberation Organization leadership in Tunis is creating a sense of uncertainty as to the future of the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

“With the Palestinians, it’s just utter chaos at this point,” said Pipes.

Many analysts agree that it is only a matter of time before Israel enters direct negotiations with the PLO, and some observers suggest that Israel is sending out feelers to PLO leaders in a testing process.

But some observers are not optimistic that talking directly with the PLO will help matters. They argue the PLO has a poor track record for consistency in its public pronouncements, is riven by factionalism and is having trouble coping with its increasingly radical constituency.

The question of the American role in the talks is also being debated.

The pattern of high-level American shuttle diplomacy in between the rounds of direct talks in Washington is becoming the preferred option here. Some even see the Washington rounds as becoming less relevant.

But others point out that the Israelis view the face-to-face talks as an important component of the peace process, one they do not wish to lose. As Beilin put it, direct talks with the Arabs are “indispensable.”