Parliamentary International Forum
The Pace of the Middle East Peace Process: Israel and Lebanon
May 28, 1996
Biographies of Commentators
Major General Trond Furuhovde is currently Special Advisor to the
Permanent Mission of Norway
to the United Nations, New York. He was commissioned a lieutenant in the Royal Norwegian Army
in 1963 and during a varied career, served as Chief of Staff of the United Nations Force in Lebanon
(UNIFIL) 1988-89 and, again, as Force Commander of UNIFIL, 1993-95. Among his decorations
are those of Commander and Grand Officer of Lebanon's National Cedar
Order.
Patrick Martin is the Foreign Editor of The Globe and Mail. He assumed
his current position in
May of 1995 and serving four years as the newspaper's Middle East Correspondent (1991-95).
Previously, he was a member of the Editorial Board of The Globe and Mail, its Focus Editor and
Associate Foreign Editor, and the Host of "Sunday Morning", the national CBC radio program.
A Background Note
Unthinkable only years ago, peace in the Middle East is now seen as a probability and only
a matter of time. The imminent Israeli elections -- on May 29 -- will provide the most up-to-date
indication of Israeli attitudes toward the peace process. On the eve of the election, the majority of
the population appears favourably disposed, but with significant reservations. At the same time, a
major study conducted by the American University in Beirut has found increased popular support for
the peace process in those Arab countries which are neighbours to Israel. There are also encouraging
developments -- notably the recent amendment by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) of its
Charter, dropping the call for the destruction of the State of Israel.
Yet despite such positive signs, the peace process remains fragile and has many enemies who
seek to disrupt it. The recent Israeli raids in Lebanon (Operation Grapes of Wrath), prompted in part
by the electoral concerns of the Peres government to act strongly against outside threats, underlined
the tenuousness of the threads that hold the peace process intact: how tightly they are stretched and
how easily they can be snapped.
Israel, Egypt, Jordan and the PLO have agreed on the terms of the peace. Israel has yet to
reach an agreement with Syria and Lebanon. In making peace those three countries each have certain
clearly-defined goals.
Lebanon arguably has suffered more than any other country in the region from the Arab-
Israeli conflict. The collapse of the political system in 1975, following the wave of Palestinian
refugees, and the radicalization of the population made it impossible for Lebanon to govern
itself and to continue the skilful foreign policy that had kept it relatively trouble-free until
then. Its powerful neighbours, Syria and Israel, took advantage of Lebanon's weakness. The
recent Israeli raids in Lebanon may actually have helped build solidarity among normally
opposing factions. But it is clear that Lebanon's hands are tied with regard to the Hizbullah;
they are another reminder of Lebanese weakness and dependence on Syria. Peace would
restore stability to Lebanon, provide a basis for the withdrawal of foreign troops from its
territory, and give the Lebanese a chance to rebuild their shattered economy.
Syria has three strategic interests in the present negotiations with Israel: the return of the
Golan Heights; continued influence in Lebanon together with international acceptance of the
concept of a "Greater Syria" plus Israeli withdrawal from Southern Lebanon; and the
maintainence of Syria as a military and political force capable of countering Israel at some
level. Syria needs peace in order to develop its economy, but it approaches negotiations
assuming that Israel's need for peace is greater than its own and
that time is on its side.
Israel lacks the security of normal relations with its neighbours. This can only be found in
peace. Only a peace accord with Syria and Lebanon can permit Israel to withdraw its forces
from Southern Lebanon and end a stalemate that destabilized the entire region, caused
considerable political discontent within Israel, and claimed far too many lives on all sides.
The election in Israel may as well be a referendum on the general peace process, given the
close identification of Prime Minister and Labour Party Leader Shimon Peres with its conception and
implementation during his long years as Foreign Minister. However, Peres' reputation as the
"architect of the peace in the Middle East" has been shaken by the ferocity of Israeli raids against
Hizbullah bases in Lebanon in early May. What Peres intended as an electoral manoeuvre to impress
floating and hawkish voters may work against him: Operation Grapes of Wrath proved to be bloodier
than expected and Arab voters in Israel (who represent 13 per cent of the electorate) may think twice
about voting for Labour, which can usually count on them to secure the thin majority necessary to
form a governing coalition.
The main two political parties have both shifted to the center in an effort to capture the
mainstream of Israeli public opinion. The Labour Party has sought to counter fears about its
advocacy of the peace process by promoting the slogan, "A strong Israel with Peres". Its platform
calls for "a New Middle East in which there will be no more wars and no terrorist acts". It advocates
continuing peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, Syria and Lebanon, securing the
borders, establishing a regional security organization, developing economic conditions and focusing
on such sensitive subjects as water resources and ecology. Labour also plans to hold a specific
referendum after negotiated agreements have been reached with the Palestinians and Syria.
The Likud Party is led by the relatively young and telegenic Benjamin Netanyahu, a former
Israeli Ambassador to the UN. Its slogan is "Making a secure peace" and it gave up its ambitions to
expand Israel's security zone in Lebanon up to the Litani River, since too many Israeli voters fear a
new and nightmarish Lebanese embroilment. The Likud supports the continuation of the peace
process and rapprochement with other Arab countries, but it takes a "Israel First" approach, planning
to shut down PLO offices in Jerusalem, to retain the West Bank and the Golan Heights as Israeli
territory, and to continue Israeli settlement in "border and sparcely-populated areas". It places
greater emphasis on Israel's security while acknowledging the value of continuing talks with Arab
groups and countries.
A new electoral system in place in Israel makes this election especially difficult to predict.
Now, voters indicate their choice for Prime Minister and separately elect Members of the Knesset or
Parliament. Seats in the Knesset are apportioned according to the number of votes each party
receives. Any party that receives more than 1.5 per cent of the votes obtains a Knesset seat. If the
polls are correct, according to The Globe and Mail's Jeffrey Simpson, that will mean 10 to 13 parties
in the new parliament.
Labour campaigners fear that under the new system voters may choose Peres as Prime
Minister, but then favour a stronger stance on defence and security issues by supporting Likud or
other parties such as the Third Way (which opposes total withdrawal from
the Golan).
A Likud victory would not reverse the peace process, as Mr. Netanyahu has said. Likudniks
and other right-wingers such as the settlers in the occupied territories have accepted many of the
changes in the political landscape as irreversible, but they will try to stop further devolution of
sovereignty to the Palestinians.
Unfortunately, a frozen peace process will not freeze violence. Some sort of peace and
rapprochement between Arabs and Israelis is the only way to end the violence, reduce the cynicism
that pervades much of public life, and restore peoples' hope for their societies and faith in the future.
1996 Israeli Elections:
Number of eligible voters: 3,933,250
Number of Jewish voters: 3,391,652
Number of non-Jewish voters: 541,598
Return to main
page