For Baker, the first crawl toward peace meant ending the region’s longstanding game of “you first.” He urged both sides to abandon rhetorical preconditions in favor of a gradual narrowing of the gap between them. Both sides accepted the idea, but in principle more than substance. The only concrete concession to emerge from last week’s diplomacy concerned the long-standing Arab call for an international Mideast peace conference. Israel has always opposed being dragged into such a forum, and after meeting with Baker, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said a conference should not be convened “without proper preparation.” From such nuance comes progress.
Washington’s new catch phrase is “confidence-building measures.” Tripartite prisoner exchanges between Lebanon, Israel and Syria would be a start. Prior notification of military maneuvers on either side is another possibility. Further on, the Arab states might agree to a regional water conference in return for Israel lifting political restrictions on Palestinians in the occupied territories. Agreements of this kind are achievable. Many Israelis are already willing to concede that deportations, detentions and other means of handling the Palestinian issue on the West Bank should be reformed. It’s the deals beyond confidencebuilding - for instance, ending the state of war with Israel in exchange for stopping settlements in the territories - that seem far less realistic.
Beyond that lie two major stumbling blocks. The first is the PLO. When Baker met with 10 Palestinian leaders in Jerusalem last week, they opened with the ritual insistence that the PLO is “the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.” The secretary of state responded that Arab leaders he had already met were so disgusted with PLO leader Yasir Arafat’s support for Saddam that they could not even sit at the same table with him. “It was as if they’d been hit by a two-by-four,” one Baker aide said. Baker then added that Washington felt the same way. He did say, however, that the Bush administration opposes Israeli settlements on the West Bank. He also hinted that Bush himself is prepared to call in some of his chits with Israel.
The second stumbling block is Israel. Support for “land for peace” - the essential bargain in any settlement - is highly unlikely in the current political configuration. During Baker’s visit, the government of Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir showed no inclination to rethink its policy of encouraging Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. This issue in particular seems impervious to any real solution.
But there is some hope that a more positive dynamic can be created. The key to it lies not in threats, but in a cagey psychological game that Baker seems well suited to play. For instance, Baker did not overtly pressure Shamir on this visit. He assured the Israeli prime minister that U.S. aid to Israel was not contingent on progress in the peace process. But by telling reporters beforehand that the Arabs were willing to be flexible if they heard a similar willingness from the Israelis, Baker put the monkey on Shamir’s back. The Israeli government was determined not to be painted as the spoiler. “Baker’s trying to create a contest to see who will be pessimistic first,” said one Israeli official. “This time it won’t be us.” That determination created an odd rhetorical breakthrough. By the time Baker departed, Shamir himself sounded downright upbeat about his Arab neighbors: “We are no longer hearing expressions of hatred. The statements are more logical. They do not speak of the destruction or elimination of Israel.”
Not right now, anyway. But whether Baker chose to see it or not, there was evidence all around him that the gulf war had not fundamentally changed political attitudes. On the day before his arrival in Jerusalem, an Arab assailant who told police he was sending a message to Baker stabbed four Israeli women to death. On the day he arrived in Damascus, the Syrian Times carried a major story entitled SINISTER ZIONIST AMBITIONS IN THE ARAB GULF REGION. If somehow George Bush does manage to pull off a genuine peace settlement, it would make his huge war victory look puny by comparison. But no one should hold his breath.
