Thursday, November 19, 1998
Faltering footsteps prevent end to Middle East hostilities
PEACE: Process hindered by false starts, violence despite good
intentions
By Michael Weiner
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
The outlook for peace in the Middle East seemed so rosy in
September 1993, when then-Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat seemingly ended years of mistrust
by shaking hands on the White House lawn.
But five year later, Rabin has been assassinated and his
progressive government has been replaced by Benjamin Netanyahu’s
conservative party. Arafat is under attack from his own people, as
terrorist bombings continue and the road toward lasting peace
appears rockier than ever.
And here at UCLA, a campus with significant populations of both
Muslims and Jews, opinions abound on the subject. But one thing is
clear: even after the Oct. 23 Wye agreement – which called for
measures to combat terrorism and Israel to withdraw from 13 percent
of the West Bank – the peace process is in danger of collapsing on
itself, and it’s not going to get any easier from here.
On Monday, Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he would suspend
troop withdrawal from the West Bank until Arafat rescinded threats
to declare a Palestinian state without Israel’s cooperation. On
Tuesday, Israel’s parliament overwhelmingly approved the Wye
agreement after Arafat took back his threats.
On Wednesday, Israelis and Palestinians resumed long-stalled
talks about a final peace treaty, while the two groups continued to
fight over details. So it goes with the yo-yo effect of the Middle
East peace process.
Attempting to accurately measure the status of the conflict,
Steven Spiegel, a UCLA political science professor, runs a project
called Peace Pulse. A joint venture between the UCLA Center for
International Relations and the Israel Policy Forum, Peace Pulse is
an index designed to objectively depict the success of the peace
process by assigning a numerical value to the prospect of peace at
any given time.
"It’s an attempt to calibrate and judge the ups and downs of the
peace process," Spiegel said.
Taking into account such indicators as the Israeli and
Palestinian economies, Israel’s standing in the international
community and recent political violence in the region, Spiegel and
a panel of experts assign a score to the level of peace in the
region, zero being total war and 10 being total peace.
The most recent measurement, at the end of 1997, assigned a
score of 3.5, the lowest score given since 1990.
Peace Pulse also seems to reflect the level of confidence of
many people in the UCLA community.
"If both sides don’t consolidate on a common opinion, I doubt if
there’s going to be any peace," said Mahvash Siddiqui, a
fourth-year biochemistry and molecular biology student and member
of the Muslim Students Association (MSA).
This year, MSA plans to organize rallies and sit-ins protesting
Zionism, the belief in the need for a Jewish homeland in
Israel.
"Amongst the Muslim community at UCLA, there’s a growing
sentiment every day to want to speak out against Zionism," said
Ahmed Shama, the group’s president, who emphasized the difference
between the Jewish religion and the political force of Zionism.
At the heart of the Middle East crisis, according to Rabbi Chaim
Seidler-Feller, director of the UCLA Hillel Jewish Student Center,
are the policies of current Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and
his government of hard-liners.
"Netanyahu is a problem in this peace process," said
Seidler-Feller.
The Israeli leader narrowly defeated Shimon Peres in a national
election in May 1996. Peres was a chief architect of the 1993 peace
accord and a member of the Labor party, the same party as Rabin. He
took over as Israel’s premier after Rabin was killed in 1995.
According to Spiegel, Netanyahu’s Likud party is much more
hesitant than the Labor party to cede land to the Palestinians.
"Labor would argue that you don’t solve these problems from
confrontation," Spiegel said. "There’s no question that Labor is
much more committed to having the process move forward."
Mainstream Israelis and Palestinians cannot be blamed for
gridlock in the peace process, according to Jewish Student Union
President Elena Lempel.
"The extremists on both sides are at fault," Lempel said. "The
two governments are trying as hard as they can to come to a
decision that everyone will be happy with."
But Shama disagrees, saying that Palestinian Authority President
Arafat is corrupt and has oppressed his own people.
"The entire peace process has actually made the situation for
Palestinian people worse than their original condition," Shama
said. "(Arafat) has cracked down on his people harder than the
Israelis have."
As the prospects for lasting peace in the Middle East continue
to waver on almost a daily basis, no one is quite sure when and if
there will be a final outcome.
"The process is in place … there is too much invested on both
sides for it to be reversed," Seidler-Feller said. "However, in the
course of pursuing the goal, there can be serious
reversals."Related site:
Peace Pulse
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]