Should we teach the Palestinians to shoot
straight?
By Neill Lochery
August 1, 2002
A new UN- and EU-sponsored Mideast peace plan is being pieced
together behind closed doors. The proposals call for thousands
of international advisors to be sent to train the Palestinians
in areas ranging from security to good governance. The as yet
untitled plan enjoys the support of UN Secretary-General, Kofi
Annan, several European governments, and key figures in the U.S.
State Department. Make no mistake: We are not talking here about
a United Nations peacekeeping force, but rather something very
new and extremely flawed.
Plans such as the latest are underpinned by the premise that
the reason the Palestinian Authority failed was because of the
technical failings of the Oslo Accords, not because of poor Palestinian
leadership that did not come to terms with the two related prerequisites
for success. Those prerequisites were the linkage of nationalist
aspirations to economic and social improvement, and an acceptance
of Israel (not as a friend, but a reality that could help rather
than hinder the achievement of a Palestinian state). In short,
the rationale of the new plan mirrors that of other recent efforts
at regenerating the Oslo peace process -- attempts which Daniel
Pipes correctly likened to applying a sticky plaster to a mortal
wound.
Ignoring for a moment the weakness of the plan's rationale, its
methodology is even more worrying. The self-confessed hardest
decision that Yitzhak Rabin ever had to take was not recognizing
the PLO -- or whether to shake Yasser Arafat's hand -- but rather
agreeing to let the security services of the PA be armed. Those
who have read the Oslo Accords will have noted that the PA policemen
were to be lightly armed. Predictably -- and, yes, Mr. Rabin suspected
this would happen -- the PA stockpiled weapons to such an extent
that a survey suggested last year that there are now more arms
per square metre in Gaza than almost anywhere else in the world.
Why does the PA need such high levels of arms? The PA line is
that they had to deal with groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad
that opposed the Oslo Accords. History has taught us that this
was pure fabrication, and that the reason was to prepare for a
military confrontation with Israel.
Understanding this point is very important, and sadly it appears
that neither the UN nor the EU has yet reached a similar conclusion.
Both institutions turn a blind eye to this blatant violation of
international accords. Instead, this new plan calls for their
security experts to train PA forces to make them more effective.
One wonders to be more effective at what -- shooting Israelis?
Imagine the scene as Special Forces from European countries teach
Palestinian security leaders about tactical warfare and how to
patrol their streets. In truth, the PA security forces are already
very good at their job. I have been impressed by the on-the-ground
security co-operation between some senior Palestinian commanders
and the Israeli army. Nobody likes talking about it, however,
because the PA security forces are viewed as traitors if the co-operation
becomes too overt. The real problem lies with the Palestinian
political leadership who misuse their security forces in the name
of nationalism.
In terms of good governance, what would the advisors suggest?
Both the UN and EU have their own critics in this area and it's
doubtful that they could offer much in the way of enlightened
advice. Don't get caught with your fingers in the till. Be careful
not to exaggerate your expense claims too much. And remember,
any election can be fixed. If I were Palestinian I would find
this part of the plan extremely condescending. Good governance
needs time and cannot be imposed from the outside. The days of
colonial rule in the Middle East are over, and the belief that
concepts such as democracy, healthy civil society and effective
state bureaucracies can be taught belongs to the age of Lawrence
of Arabia, not to the 21st century.
My real concern, however, is that the plan must represent the
best efforts of these political leaders. It is a damning indictment
of both the UN and EU that they can do no better than this. It
is, in effect, a shift from Plan A to Plan Z with no intermediate
plans being tried. To be sure, some will argue that the stationing
of some form of international force in the Middle East is the
only viable way out of the current impasse. This, of course, is
nonsense. What is required at present is the transition of power
away from the current leadership of the PA to the younger generation
of Palestinian leaders, many of whom still live in exile in Europe
and the United States. Let the Palestinians put their own house
in order. It may take longer, but is a much less dangerous path
than letting the outside world do it for them.
Dr Neill Lochery is Director of the Centre for Israeli Studies
at University College, London
This article was originally published in the National
Post on August 1, 2002
