| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The signing of the Oslo Accords created a tremendous sense of optimism. The Declaration of Principles signed between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Israeli government in 1993 led to many countries establishing diplomatic relations with Israel, a rise in Israel's GNP, and two productive economic conferences in Morocco and Jordan. One of the memories that best symbolizes this period for me occurred in May 1994: I had been invited to Washington by the president of the United States, and on the plane ride there, the whole cabin approached me with their menus asking me to autograph them. People were really excited, telling me: "This is peace! It's good for both parties." I felt their euphoria. It was a win-win game.
You cannot sign a peace treaty in a win-lose game, while devastating the other party. One only needs to look at what happened to the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq as examples. You don't really achieve a long-term solution with devastating wars. The only way you can build real peace is if it's a win-win situation: through negotiations, conversations and dialogues that lead to agreements which equally - or at least satisfactorily - satisfy both people. When it comes to our situation, I think it's not normal to talk now about permanence in these negotiations. Why? Because the interim agreement has continued for over 20 years. It is now 20 years since we signed the Declaration of Principles and the Oslo Agreement in the White House. So we have lived for 20 years in "interimness," and we have become accustomed to it. But "interimness" is not good for the Palestinians: While we've been in this seemingly never-ending interim time period, the Israeli government has been unilaterally changing the parameters, the terms of reference and the reality on the ground, thereby undermining the basis for a permanent solution.
|