The road to Damascus is open
If Syria cools its relations with Iran and its allies and chooses peace, Israel must move in Syria's direction, even returning the Golan.
By Uri Savir Tags: Golan Heights Syria Middle East peace Israel newsSomething is cooking between Washington and Damascus. U.S. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been talking a lot about regional peace and not just an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord. In addition, Syrian President Bashar Assad is calling on Israel to resume negotiations. Israel must seriously consider entering peace talks with Syria and embracing an American initiative for an agreement that would include an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, security arrangements, as well as nature reserves and tourist areas in the Golan.
If Syria cools its relations with Iran and its allies and chooses peace, Israel must move in Syria's direction, even returning the Golan. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must adopt a realistic approach to negotiations and consider shuffling the coalition government and adding the Kadima party.
As the head of the Israeli delegation to negotiations with Syria at the end of 1995 and the beginning of 1996, it's hard for me to believe that Syria's fundamental positions have changed. Syria received an American assurance (Yitzhak Rabin's so-called deposit left with U.S. secretary of state Warren Christopher) that if all Israel's interests are addressed, mainly concerning defense and the nature of the peace, Israel would be prepared for an all-out withdrawal from the Golan. Rabin did not define the border's location, while the Syrians demanded the 1967 lines. We made progress concerning defense and the nature of the peace, but the talks ended after Palestinian and Lebanese terror acts and Israel's Operation Grapes of Wrath in Lebanon in 1996.
The Netanyahu government must understand that there will be no agreement without a total withdrawal from the Golan Heights. Israel cannot agree, however, to a withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 borders, which would put the Syrians at the Kinneret's shores. The final border must represent a compromise between the international border of 1923 and the 1967 lines.
Syria has a standing army and we have an army of reservists, so there must be assurances that Syria will not mount a surprise attack. We must insist on demilitarization into the depths of Syria so tanks would need 48 hours to get to Israel. The Damascus area, where Syria would maintain troops to protect the regime, would be the exception. Israel must insist that Syria distance itself from Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, and that Syria not back or host terrorist organizations. Peace with Syria, even according to the Syrians, provides an opening for comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
The United States would play a security role, giving Israel intelligence information, monitoring the security arrangements and perhaps also stationing troops in the Golan Heights. Israel needs to consider a defense pact with the United States as part of a peace package with Syria. In any case, Israel must insist on full normalization. Syria has agreed to commercial and tourism ties. It is important that normalization not consist just of legal documents, but include joint projects. It would be good to see the Golan become a special tourist area containing nature reserves and hotels accessible to Israelis.
Tourism would also provide a security guarantee. The peace must also address a solution to Israel and Syria's water needs. It's important that water from Syria and Lebanon continue to flow into Israel, and joint desalination facilities should be planned for the three countries.
Many people, especially on the right, consider talk about the possibility of peace with Syria as impractical, or as an obscenity. It isn't. From the security standpoint, it would be Israel's most valuable peace agreement. Progress on the Syrian track would not come at the expense of negotiations with the Palestinians, and would be a vital component in the regional peace we seek. The Netanyahu government must take advantage of the Americans' stance, proceed in this direction and see to Israel's long-term security.
The writer, the president of the Peres Center for Peace, chaired the Oslo Accords negotiating team.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
In the democratic world the solution of OLD disputes is determined by the current inhabitants of the disputed areas. The well being of the current population and not historical rights are determining. Ousting people from their homes is not practiced in such cases. There are many examples. For example the UN divided Palestine in 1947 by giving the Arabs the regions where they were a majority and to the Jews the region with Jewish majority. The UN disregarded the historical rights totally. Golan may be divided into a Druze and a Jewish regions and the sovereignty of each region should be determined by secret vote
Netanyahu should take it, one never knows, he might get illumination! There are historical precedents. They produced changes which are over 2000 years old now, just as much as the time there were no Jews/zionists in the area.
Fanatic zionists always right! Netayahu has said very clearly that: -The problem will not be solved in Israel; - There are no concessions on: Settlements will continue, houses demolishing will continue, no right of return, no compensation, Palestine is Jordan, The Palestinian state will not exist, Israel is a jewish country. etc. What is there to negotiate? Mass transportation to Amman?
You are wrong, It was Gazza first in 2005 and it semms it will be the last.
to wipe out Assad dinasty from Mideast and install a democratic Arab state in Damascus-
Wanting Golan then offering to talk about peace is for apologists to pontificate over. With peace comes removal of Israeli early warning stations on the Golan. War is hell. Who forced the Arabs to kick out the UN peacekeepers and blackade Israeli shipping?An act of war. The Arabs were warned repeatedly to desist,they boasted how they would wipe out Israel instead. The Arabs lost. When they want peace they will offer peace as a quid pro quo,not some nebulous "we will talk about it"
CJK: "unless syria is willing to cut all of its relations with the holocaust denying terror regime of iran, there is nothing to discuss." That sounds mighty like a "precondition" to me, Cipora. I thought you and your Likud buddies were dead-set against any negotiations unless they were "negotiations without preconditions"? How odd, heh?
unless syria is willing to cut all of its relations with the holocaust denying terror regime of iran, there is nothing to discuss. relying on the u.s. for security would be a fatal mistake. israel can only count on herself for its self-defence. the u.s. can barely maintain its many security arrangements and interests worldwide.
Israel conquered the Golan in a war started by Syria. Why should Israel give it back? What can you expect from the man who brought us the death of thousand of Israelis and Palestinians via the Oslo agreement.
Goood article! Almost as Good as "Alice through the looking glass".
You got it backward: YOU have to return stolen property! The Golan is NOT yours to keep so you can control the water!
As an article of faith Syria could cede the entire Golan to Israel permanently the pull back all of its forces fifty miles from Israel first unilaterally and Israel will consider making peace with Syria.
This long-delayed peace would bring Israel another valuable asset - opening landroutes (both highway and railroad) to Europe and the Caucasus, thus ending the country's exclusive reliance on air and sea transportation. The economic effect for trade and tourism would be huge.
Once Syria forgoes any claim of the GOlan for all of time than there is reason to talk otherwise there is nothing to discuss until Syria's unconditional surrender to Israel.
No, actually that's wrong too, both should be given back together in the frame work of a broad peace agreement. Giving back the Golan, without at the same time reaching an agreement on the West Bank, won't bring Israel anymore security. That's just an illusion.
Didn't Assad say that he would only talk on the basis of having the whole of the Golan back and the day before that that the Palestinian question had to be resolved as part of a comprehensive deal? Fine by me if our government has accepted that, but all this seesawing is comical to watch. Look forward to the next development. It's looking a lot like our old friends Messrs. Staged Diversion and Procrastination are back.
Making a deal with the unstable dictatorial regime in Syria would be the biggest mistake in Israel's history and after the debacle of the Gaza withdrawal there would be no public support for another one. What's the rush to kill ourselves?.