Photos: AFP-Getty Images
Ready to Talk: Israel's Olmert (left) and Syria's Assad
MIDDLE EAST

‘A Huge Day’

The start of peace talks between Israel and Syria could re-align regional politics and change Damascus's relationship with Iran, says a veteran Israeli negotiator.

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

For weeks, the Middle East has been buzzing with talk that Turkey has been mediating secret peace negotiations between Israel and Syria. On Wednesday, the speculation ended: both governments confirmed the reports, issuing statements just minutes apart. The dialogue, according to the Israeli version, is intended to be "serious and continuous" and would aim for a "comprehensive peace in accordance with the Madrid Conference terms of reference." The brief mention of the Madrid Conference, Israeli-Arab negotiations that were cosponsored by Washington and Moscow in 1991, is particularly important because it may signal renewed U.S. involvement, according to former Israeli foreign ministry official Alon Liel, who spent nearly two years between 2004 and 2006 in secret talks with a Syrian mediator. Shortly after the announcement, Liel spoke with NEWSWEEK's Kevin Peraino. Excerpts:      
 
NEWSEEK: Is this the real thing?
Alon Liel: I think it's a breakthrough.

Do you think this was done with an American blessing?
I think it was coordinated with the Americans. The fact that the three leaders agreed on the Madrid framework means that the Americans will be a part of it. Not only would the Americans be involved, but the Palestinians. The leaders see the talks as including the Syrians and the Palestinians, which is very, very meaningful.
 
Why do you think the Madrid language is so important--because the talks would be multilateral instead of bilateral?
Exactly.

Didn't [U.S. Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice say recently that she supports indirect talks between Syria and Israel?
The Americans have always said that they have nothing against [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert talking to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad--but that they wouldn't participate. It was hypocritical because they knew that if they didn't enter the talks, nothing would change. I see, from today, the Americans as a player. I think this is probably related to a change in the American position.
 
What do you see as the most problematic potential sticking point in the upcoming negotiations?
I think the most complicated area will be the relationship between Syria and Iran. I see a big battle here. Syria will want to maintain contact with Iran. Once you have such a statement, imagine the feeling of Iran. It's not only Olmert taking a risk, it's also Assad taking a very big risk. Both leaders are doing something very courageous. Also, Syria will have to bring about a change of behavior regarding Hamas.
 
Is it realistic to expect Syria would completely sever ties with Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas as part of a deal?
I'm not sure Syria and Iran can be strategic allies [after a peace deal]. A comprehensive peace agreement will necessitate meaningful changes. I don't think Syria can have peace and normal relations with both Israel and Hizbullah, or Israel and Hamas. It's almost mutually exclusive.
 
Could you see a day when Hizbullah is carrying out military operations against Syria as a result?
I really don't know how Hizbullah will act. I don't think they'd want to destroy--in a stupid way, from their perspective--this ongoing contact they have [with Damascus]. I don't know about the Iranian reaction. Nobody should start speculating. 
 
Less than a year ago Israel bombed Syria, and many believe the Mossad was behind the assassination of Hizbullah leader Imad Mugniyeh in Damascus earlier this year. What do you make of the timing?
[The talks] wouldn't happen if it weren't in the strategic interests of both countries. It's in the very basic interest of Syria to preserve ties with the West. For Israel, peace is a must. These are things that are far beyond the military developments. From day one it was clear that it will happen because it's a vital interest of both sides.
 
Do you think a deal is possible before Bush leaves office?
He might get an agreement before the end of his term. But it doesn't really matter whether it's December 2008 or February 2009.

Olmert is unpopular and in the midst of what appears to be a serious police investigation. Is he really politically strong enough to make peace right now?
I don't know. Maybe Olmert won't be the one to finalize it. But it's not Olmert personally--it's the state of Israel. It's an official move, nothing personal. Olmert is not alone.

How do we know this announcement isn't just timed to deflect attention from Olmert's scandals?
It's not spin. It's a real thing. It might be helpful to Olmert politically. But I don't care who brings the peace--I'll welcome it. When you see a statement published simultaneously in Damascus, Ankara and Jerusalem--it's short, but extremely meaningful. It's done in good faith. It's a real thing, and I'm really happy. For me, it's a huge day.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution

Using emotion to convince people to change.

Heaven Can Wait
Heaven Can Wait

A new book promises proof of eternal life.

The World's Biggest Foods
The World's Biggest Foods

Monster edibles from around America.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: The_epoch_point @ 05/27/2008 9:13:31 AM

    Wisconsin's unique landmarks once again find themselves in the pages of the latest novel to be presented to readers of history, thrillers and religion in a work that combines all three genres into an adventurous global conspiracy.

    The Epoch Point, just released on May 1 and written by Wisconsin native Spencer Zimmerman, is a fictional novel that includes historical facts, certain to intrigue history buffs who are interested in history from the local to the international level, especially as that history thrillingly plays out into what Zimmerman describes as a worldwide "conflict between God and the devil, good and evil."

    According to the book's synopsis, the lead character, Robert Davis, is "a young Airman fresh out of Air Force basic training," reflective of Zimmerman's own recent service in the Air Force. "After being held captive in China, (Davis) suddenly finds himself unraveling the most immense conspiracy in history...soon uncovering hidden facts suggesting Russian and Iraqi involvement...discovering the diary of Lee Harvey Oswald...As the clues surface, an evil emerges powerful enough to rewrite the entire history of humanity...before long the conspiracy takes on a supernatural form, marked by [natural disasters] and the wrath of God...Nothing [prepares] (Davis) for the final suspenseful twist the story takes, a da Vinci style revelation that reaffirms his belief in Christ."

    The book's chapters are titled after the sixty-six books of the Bible, and the plot progresses as Davis reads through each chapter of the Bible, opening the Bible for the first time in chapter one of The Epoch Point. Each chapter follows a "flashback" style in structure, in which the book's characters experience revelations of historical events and experiences from 4000 B.C. to the present, which allow them to observe how those events contributed to the global conspiracy they are presently confronting. Zimmerman states that the book's events begin on New Year's Eve of 2000, and end on Christmas of 2006.

    While writing novels remains at present a hobby for Zimmerman, he already has ideas for a second novel that he anticipates will follow a more scientific fiction path. The Epoch Point is currently available through Amazon.com, and Zimmerman is hoping to get copies of the book into some of Lake Mills's downtown novelty shops.

  • Posted By: renewableenergy2 @ 05/25/2008 2:53:03 PM

    Jay Draiman.

    PS
    20 Years of Research Reveals Jerusalem Belongs to Jews

    by Hillel Fendel

    (IsraelNN.com) Jacques Gauthier, a non-Jewish Canadian lawyer who spent 20 years researching the legal status of Jerusalem, has concluded: "Jerusalem belongs to the Jews, by international law.".

    Gauthier has written a doctoral dissertation on the topic of Jerusalem and its legal history, based on international treaties and resolutions of the past 90 years. The dissertation runs some 1,300 pages, with 3,000 footnotes. Gauthier had to present his thesis to a world-famous Jewish historian and two leading international lawyers - the Jewish one of whom has represented the Palestinian Authority on numerous occasions.



    Gauthier's main point, as summarized by Israpundit editor Ted Belman, is that a non-broken series of treaties and resolutions, as laid out by the San Remo Resolution, the League of Nations and the United Nations, gives the Jewish People title to the city of Jerusalem. The process began at San Remo, Italy, when the four Principal Allied Powers of World War I - Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan - agreed to create a Jewish national home in what is now the Land of Israel. .

  • Posted By: renewableenergy2 @ 05/25/2008 2:49:59 PM

    NO PALESTINIAN STATE ??? No land concessions R3.

    Imagine that the various people who settled in the United States for the past 300 years decided one day that they one to parcel the United States into an independent State just for them, would the American public go for it. The Answer is absolutely NO.

    The situation in Israel today is no different. The Arabs there are not Palestinians, there is no such Arab nation as Palestine or Palestinian people.

    Europeans countries today are consisting of numerous people from other countries. Would the Europeans people cede part of their country to set up another State in their midst. The answer is absolutely NO.

    All the Arabs in Israel and surrounding areas are from the various Arab nations, such as Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon and other Arab nations.

    Prominent PLO Arab says there are no 'Palestinians' and no "Palestine"

    PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein admitted in a March 31, 1977 interview with a Dutch newspaper Trouw.

    "The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. "

    The Qur'an 17:104 - states the land belongs to the Jewish people

    If the historic documents, comments written by eyewitnesses and declarations by the most authoritative Arab scholars are still not enough, let us quote the most important source for Muslim Arabs:
    "And thereafter we [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".
    017.104

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now