Inching Forward in the Mideast

By The New York Times Editorial Board.  July 26, 2013

 

The week that Secretary of State John Kerry said could start the revival of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks is passing without visible progress. The naysayers are chortling, but Mr. Kerry, to his credit, is undeterred. His aides insist that plans to resume the dialogue on a two-state solution that collapsed in 2010 are on track; on Thursday, an Israeli minister said that talks could begin next week.

 

Even if they do, the path will never be smooth. The differences are deeply felt, and the two sides have repeatedly squandered chances for peace. After Mr. Kerry announced last Friday that he would bring Israeli and Palestinian negotiators to Washington “within a week or so,” both sides poured cold water on the idea. The Palestinians said talks could not begin without an agreement that would be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 war; the Israelis rejected that and said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would not even proceed with talks without approval from his divided cabinet. That could come on Sunday.

 

While crucial details remain secret, Mr. Kerry has used six trips to the region to pursue a sensible strategy to nudge the two sides to the table. The Arab League has given the Palestinians political cover to enter talks by endorsing Mr. Kerry’s efforts and modifying their 2002 Arab Peace Initiative so it is more in line with American and Israeli positions. The international community has promised the Palestinians a $4 billion economic package.

      

For its part, Israel has said it will release 82 Palestinian prisoners convicted after the 1993 Oslo accords. It has also slowed the expansion of settlements that have shrunk the land available for a Palestinian state. As a concession to Israel, the Palestinians will not ask the United Nations to further upgrade their status while negotiations are under way. The European Union has weighed in: on the one hand pressuring Israel with the threat of reduced aid if it does not negotiate, and on the other putting Hezbollah’s military wing on the terror list.

      

Half-measures will not do. To be fruitful, negotiations must proceed quickly to core issues. Palestinians need to have the borders of their state defined, and Israelis need to know that the new state will not threaten their security. But other critical issues — Jerusalem’s future and the fate of Palestinian refugees — must also be addressed.

 

One sign of Mr. Kerry’s optimism is his plans to name a full-time envoy to oversee negotiations. It is reported to be Martin Indyk, a former ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration. While well-versed on the issues and known to regional leaders, Mr. Indyk has a long association with pro-Israel groups. He, or whoever is chosen, will need to be creative and even handed in pressing both Mr. Netanyahu and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, on a compromise.

      

The pessimists insist that this is not the time, and these are not the leaders, for a peace deal. Yet the future seems increasingly unpredictable and the consequences of inaction increasingly grave. No good can come if Israel, with its growing Palestinian population, evolves from a Jewish majority state to an Arab majority state; if disenfranchised Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza remain stateless in an increasingly restive region; and if the long sought dream of a Palestinian state is left to die.