Sharm el-Sheikh: A victory without winners

The substantial difference in the third summit as compared to the previous ones was the absence of the late Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat, the leader who didn't want to end the violence. Had he been alive, the most recent summit would not have taken place.

Each side will now declare victory. Despite the declarations of PA President Mahmoud Abbas that the armed intifada has caused severe damage to the Palestinians, in Palestinian public opinion (according to surveys conducted by Khalil Shikaki, director of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah), a clear majority believes that it was only the violence that made Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decide on disengagement and the dismantling of settlements, and that because of it he declared that he doesn't want to rule over the Palestinian people.

The Israel Defense Forces are convinced that only military pressure and the achievements in preventing suicide terrorism caused the Palestinians to end the intifada. In the overall accounting, Israel can see the end of the present round of warfare as a victory, but it must remember that it did not defeat the Palestinian side.

Even when it comes to a limited conflict against a weak side, once again the limitations of Israel's power were evident. These limitations have remained, despite the sweeping support that Israel received from Washington, and despite the serious mistakes made by the Palestinians. Recognition of the limits of power is apparently what led Sharon and most of Israel's citizens to the decision that the lines vis a vis the Palestinians should be shortened, in other words, that some withdrawal or other should be carried out.

The Palestinians failed in their attempt to drag Arab countries into a military conflict, but the deep involvement of Hezbollah and of the Iranians in the terror in the territories is clear to Israel. The Palestinians failed to bring an international force to the territories, but Israel was forced to accept the "road map," which calls for a great deal of international involvement.

Even from a military point of view, things are not simple. Israel subdued the Palestinians, chalked up impressive achievements in preventing terror, and in effect reoccupied the West Bank. Despite that, Israel had several major operational failures. It did not succeed in putting an end to the Qassam rockets, failed to stop the smuggling of arms and munitions to the territories, including the smuggling of materials for producing explosives from Israel. To this, we should add the smuggling of money to terrorist organizations.

The two nations have paid a high price in blood in the latest round of violence. The chance for a total end to the conflict is not great, but there is a chance for a prolonged cease-fire. Israel must carry out a comprehensive study of the mistakes made after the Oslo Accords, including a reexamination of criteria that were considered sacred. In any case of violation of agreements, Israel must make sure that the blame does not fall on it.

The Palestinian public will also undergo a shake-up. Among other things, there will definitely be more Hamas supporters becoming part of local government by means of the elections. Israel will find that confrontation between the extremist elements and the pragmatic elements among the Palestinians also depends on what Israel itself does.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/539024.html