More to it than meets the eye

Jan.19, 2007

More to it than meets the eye

A revelation by an Israeli newspaper that Israelis and Syrians were engaged in secret negotiations but did not resume the talks after last year's Israeli assault on Lebanon could be interpreted in many ways. The Israeli and Syrian governments have denied the report, but it has been more or less confirmed that bilateral talks did take place with government approval but no senior official attended the meetings.
The revelation remind us of the secret negotiations that Israel launched with the Palestinians that led to the 1993 Oslo agreement they signed. The negotiations were held in Norway parallel to formal talks that were launched at an international conference in Madrid in 1991. The Oslo agreement signed in September 1993 was then seen as a major breakthrough since it led to mutual recognition by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO). It set out a process that should have led to negotiations on a final peace agreement in five years had it not been for political upheavals in Israel and the assumption of power by hardliners who had opposed the Oslo deal in the first place.
The secret Syrina-Israeli meetings that were held in Europe from September 2004 to June 2006 are described as an academic exercise by the Israelis. However, no such talks could take place without Israeli government approval.
The confirmation that Israel and Syria held secret talks indicates that there is an Israeli willingness to reopen the Syria file. In recent years, the file was believed to be closed forever because it was deemed impossible for either side to make compromises over their demands. Syria wants the entire Golan Heights — which Israel seized in 1967 — returned to its sovereignty and is willing to recognise the state of Israel and normalise relations with it in exchange for the strategic heights, which overlooks Lake Tiberias in northern Israel.
It is possible that the disclosure of talks was aimed at "exposing" Syria — that Damascus had held secret talks with Israel while engaging in anti-Israeli rhetorics to placate the Palestinians and Hizbollah. However, it would not have the desired effect because it is widely accepted that Israel and the Arabs would have to make peace sooner or later and there should be nothing untoward in Damascus exploring possibilities of securing its demands in return for normalisation of ties with the Jewish state.
Israel should be interested in exploring possibilities of making peace with Syria, but the problem is that it wants to impose conditions and wants to put the cart before the horse.
It wants Syria to expel Palestinian groups based in Syrian territory and stop backing Lebanon's Hizbollah group. Damascus could not meet the Israeli demand because it sees its links with the Palestinian groups and Hizbollah as strategically important. Its implicit argument is that its relations with the Palestinian groups and Hizbollah would cease to be an issue when it makes peace with Israel.
While denying the Israeli report of secret talks, the official Syrian media — which relay leadership thinking — said Damascus said it did not want secret negotiations, and what it wanted was an Israeli pledge to return the Golan Heights. That is the crux of the matter.
Perhaps the times is opportune for a new push towards Israeli-Syrian peace because the geopolitics have changed since the last time they met.
Israel should have learnt that it has lost its deterrent capabilities when it failed to break Hizbollahs' resistance during last year's war.
There is no doubt that Syria holds the key to preventing another Israeli war on Lebanon, and this realisation should be the motivating factor for Israeli leaders to re-engage the Syrians in negotiations — in secret or in public as long as they have accepted the inevitability of having to return the Golan to Syria.