Middle East briefing

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
14 March 2001
BRIEFING ON MIDDLE EAST

Chairperson: Mr E I Ebrahim

SUMMARY
A briefing on the Middle East was given by the Department's Middle East Directorate directors. They said there is now no peace process in the Middle East; rather, it is a "low intensity war".

The South African government maintains that the Americans misperceive how deeply the Arabs experience Israeli violations of peace process agreements. The USA has been inconsistent; as a result of this inconsistency, the Arabs now distrust the peace process.

South Africa has a very clear position in support of Palestinian self-determination. It has recognised the Palestinian state since 1995. Its response, however, to Middle East issues also depends on its multi-lateral environment ie the Organisation of African Unity (OAU).

MINUTES
Two Directors of the Department's Middle East Directorate, Mr Ferguson and Mr Viljoen, gave a briefing on the Middle East. The Chairperson introduced the speakers by saying South Africa is concerned about the violence in that area and the breakdown of the peace process. He said the situation is complicated by new governments in both Israel and the United States. The position of the new American administration on the Middle East is still unknown.

Director Ferguson began by saying there is now no peace process in the Middle East. He warned Committee members against making the mistake of assuming there is an on-going peace process; things have so broken down that there is now effectively nothing. The situation could now be accurately called a "low intensity war".

The causes of the current violence are multiple, including Palestinian frustration with the Oslo agreement and frequent roadblocks through the divided territories that impede the movements of Palestinians, even from doing the most ordinary and essential things, like going to work or visiting relatives. Israeli security is now seen as very intensive and intrusive. There is an increasing number of Israeli settlers in Palestinian territory and these people tend to be very aggressive individuals.

Mr Ferguson noted that the expression of violence in the region has changed in character: whereas it used to be the spontaneous throwing of stones by youth it is now more of an armed controntation.

Arab voters stayed away from the polls, resulting in extremist "right wing" Israeli leaders coming into power.

The South African government maintains that the Americans misperceive how deeply the Arabs experience Israeli violations of peace process agreements. The USA has been inconsistent and misunderstands how important consistency is to the peace process. The meetings at Camp David were hastily convened and former President Clinton pressed the leaders to reach an agreement. Camp David also made Jerusalem into an area of major confrontation. As a result of this inconsistency, the Arabs now distrust the peace process. They feel they have made so many concessions that they now resist making any more. There is a deep sense of dissatisfaction and alienation in the Palestinian community.

Mr Ferguson said he hesitated to make predictions, but did venture that the violent confrontations would not end. Israeli options are now very limited. Israeli leaders make the mistake of seeing Arabs as "undemocratic" and so think the public mood of the Palestinians can be manipulated by their leaders. This is a big mistake, he said, asserting that the "mood" of the Palestinian public will be a determinative factor in the conflict.

A change in US policy toward the Middle East is anticipated, and also to Iraq. The Americans cannot continue to let Israel ignore UN Security Council resolutions while insisting that Iraq follow them to the letter. Ultimately, the USA cannot continue to maintain its one-sided approach to Israel.

Discussion
(Q) Dr Geldenhuys (NNP) asked what will follow, now that Oslo has run its course.

(A) Mr Ferguson said all Oslo agreements were interim only. The Israelis have exploited the interim period and now exploit what he called a "constructive ambiguity". The territorial definition of Jerusalem is key. Any arrangement for peace will have to address the question of sharing.

(Q) An ANC member asked what is the nature of Palestine ie is it a state? He wondered if it can be compared to the former "Bantu Authorities" in South Africa.

(A) Mr Viljoen said the situation is complicated, but Palestinian land is under Israeli military occupation. The Oslo agreement defines three areas. The Palestinian authority has administrative control over towns. In smaller villages, Israel has security forces in place. In places of low habitation, the majority of the country, Israel is in full control. 40 per cent of the West Bank is under Palestinian control, compared to 70 per cent of the Gaza strip. This is because all of the important religious sites are in the West Bank; the west coast does not have this historical and religious significance. The fact that the Palestinian authority is an interim one is a Palestinian choice. There are 1 million refugees living in the Palestinian diaspora.

(Q) Ms F Hajaij (ANC) asked the speakers how they could say Israel's options are limited when it is completely backed by the US.

(A) Mr Ferguson said the Israeli Parliament is extremely divided and Mr Sharon is an extremist who will not stand back. Negotiations with Palestinians have become unworkable. All of these conditions narrow Israel's options.

(Q) An ANC member asked how our Foreign Affairs Department views the position of the current government of Israel.

(A) Mr Ferguson said South Africa has a very clear position, to support Palestinian self-determination. It has recognised the Palestinian state since 1995. Its response, however, to Middle East issues also depends on its multi-lateral environment ie the Organisation of African Unity (OAU).

(Q) Another ANC member asked if Palestinian self-determination would continue to be obstructed by the USA.

(A) Mr Ferguson said the USA does not see the prevention of Palestinian self-determination as being in its interests. But it can no longer afford to be seen as supporting Israel. This impedes it as a peacemaker.

Mr Viljoen ended the discussion with the comment that Israelis and Palestinians live very separate lives. Other than the Palestinians who work in Israel, they rarely come into contact with each other.

The meeting was adjourned.