Geopolitical Diary: Wednesday, April 30, 2003

STRATFOR ^ | Apr 30, 2003

[Axion]

Geopolitical Diary: Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Apr 30, 2003

The inevitable happened in Tel Aviv shortly after midnight local time on April 30, when a suicide bomber struck a bar near the U.S. Embassy, killing at least three people and injuring 49. The attack came a few hours after the Palestinian Parliament installed Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas' new Cabinet. Abbas had committed himself to enforcing a ban on attacks on Israelis. The attack throws into question the swearing in of the new Cabinet on the 30th, given that Israeli policy is to respond quickly and intensely to suicide bombings. It will be very important to watch whether the Israelis hold to their expected pattern.

The suicide bombing sums up perfectly the fundamental dilemma in any Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Regardless of what institutional arrangements are in place, the Palestine National Authority does not control all Palestinians. A large segment of the Palestinian community intensely opposes any agreement that recognizes the state of Israel and commits itself to paramilitary operations against it. Regardless of how small the number might be that takes this position, the fact is that some Palestinians will. So long as this group is prepared to carry out suicide and other forms of attacks, they have control of the peace process.
To be more precise, if the Israeli policy is to respond quickly to all attacks, then the Palestinians can, in effect, order up an Israeli assault on Palestinian territories whenever they want. Thus, any evolution toward a peace settlement among the official Palestinian leadership will be destroyed by an Israeli attack. The trigger to that attack is any Palestinian willing to die. Since there seems to be an ample supply of these, it follows that Palestinian radicals can shut down the peace process whenever they want.

The easy argument to make is that the Israelis should not respond to the suicide attack. But it is easier to argue for this policy than to implement it. Tonight's attack occurred in the heart of Tel Aviv. It is politically difficult to acknowledge that not only is it impossible to stop the attacks defensively, but that no punitive, offensive action will be taken. That argument could be taken in any one case. For example, the Israelis could well forego a response in order to let the new Palestinian government take office. But the problem is that the Palestinian radicals have the ability to determine whether or not this will be a single incident. The Sharon government conceivably could let a single bombing pass, but it could not ignore a continuing campaign. The Palestinians seem able to stage these operations at will. Therefore, sooner or later, the Israelis will respond.

The issue facing the peace process -- if there is to be any -- is how it can go forward in the face of suicide bombings. One choice is that the Israelis learn to live with this, and that over time the attacks will taper off. That is a tough argument to make. Another choice is that the PNA collaborate with the Israelis to liquidate the suicide bombing cells. That is hard to do. The new government has only limited credibility among Palestinians as it stands. If it were also seen as collaborating with the Israelis, it would decrease its effectiveness and make any peace agreement it arrives at all the more worthless.

This is not a new issue. It has been the ongoing problem in the Israeli-Palestinian relationship from the beginning. In order to make peace, the Palestinians must give the Israelis what they want the most: guaranteed physical security. That means that the Palestinian state must be strong enough to shut down active opposition -- without Israeli intervention. This has never existed nor is it possible to imagine how it will exist in the future. There will always be a faction prepared to attack Israel and trigger an Israeli counterattack on the Palestinians. No Israeli government will ever be able to say that a peace agreement should be signed if physical security can't be guaranteed by the Palestinians.

The situation is back where it was after Camp David, when great hopes encountered hard reality. The greater the hope, the harsher the response. It is for this reason that we always have been and continue to be extremely pessimistic about any comprehensive settlement between Israelis and Palestinians, and why we are always dubious about peace initiatives. Some people say it's worth a try. Our view is that it really isn't, because every time someone tries, the situation gets worse.