Israel and Syria know something that Bush and McCain do not. Enemies, divided by a bitter disagreement, need to negotiate with one another in order to settle their differences. Even James (don’t forget my role in stealing Florida) Baker knows this.
There are official announcements from both capitals today of what has been known about for months: Israel and Syria are having serious negotiations to settle their differences. As I will explain below this is both real and very important.
Syria is of course one of the countries that borders Israel and has rejected the existence of Israel since the United Nations and internationally accepted declarations in 1947-48. Peace has been made with Egypt and Jordan. In addition to huge issue of how to establish the just and necessary (but never before existing) Palestinian State, of the countries that border Israel countries only Syria and Lebanon (which most believe will quickly follow or be directly part of any Syrian settlement) remain.
After repeated attacks from the strategic Golan Heights, Israel seized and occupied the area since 1967. Syria wants its land back. Israel wants peace and recognition with Syria, no attacks by anybody across the northern border, and for Syria to stop promoting fighting between Israel and Lebanon (Hezbollah) and the Palestinians (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, others). Syria has made clear over the years that it can effectively block peacemaking with others, until it gets what it wants.
Most observers feel that compared to the Palestinians, in principle this is a relatively easy peace deal to make. It is "just" land (and access to water). There is no religious element, no major cities, and just much smaller settlements and populations involved. But see below for more details on the issues.
The prior round of official talks stalled at the end of the Clinton administration. These talks actually occurred just prior to failed Camp David talks with Arafat, when both Israel and Syria hesitated tantalizingly close to agreement.
As a side note, AIPAC right wing dead-enders actually played a role in undercutting the official Israeli government position here in the U.S. Israel want U.S. troops as part of a monitoring force along the demilitarized border area. Even though AIPAC claims its role is to support and lobby for the official Israeli government position here in the U.S., they showed their hand as really supporting the unilateralist partisan Likud/Neocon/Republican line. AIPAC argued against the official Israeli position at the time, getting its congressional allies to argue against such a peace agreement, arguing against any role for U.S. troops, saying they would be in danger or potential hostages.
There had been unofficial talks last year, before then Lebanon/Hezbollah war, that came up with a clever way to bridge the difference between Syria getting all of its land back and Israel needing to keep a verifiable safe border, by making some of the land a demilitarized nature park.
In the current Israeli coalition government, the junior partner Labor party (which is led again by Barak who had been the Prime Minister at the time of the 2000 talks and who is now Defense Minister) and Foreign Minister Livni from the senior Kadima party had been wanting to have these talks for years, since even before the last war with Lebanon.
The embattled Prime Minister Olmert had been resisting such talks, and until now the Bush administration had been also arguing against any talks, taking a harder line against Syria then Israel. Indeed, there were times when it seemed the Bush administration was the main factor holding Israel back from talking with Syria. Presumably we can read this a relatively victory for Rice and the realists over Cheney and unilateral fantasists. However there are still doubts about whether the current Bush administration can and will play a positive role.
As always, Israeli domestic politics is part of this (no doubt there are political differences within the Syrian government too, but since it is a military dictatorship we don't know as much about them). Foreign Minister Livni wants to take over from Olmert. Olmert is still low in the polls from both his failures in the war with Lebanon and because he is crook who is continually under investigation for financial shenanigans, bribery and misuse of campaign funds (the fifth such investigation is headlining now). He keeps propping himself up with the tantalizing possibility of peace talks, whether this is with the Palestinians or now Syria. The implication is always that if he goes, then the Israeli government goes through a period of instability when it cannot hold serious peace talks. Interesting from an Israeli domestic perspective is that, although the Syrian announcement is from their Foreign Minister's office, the Israeli's announcment comes from the Prime Minster's office. Olmert clearly wants tied to him directly and bypassing his intra-party rival Foreign Minister Livni.
Meanwhile talks with the Palestinians are necessary and yet seen by many as impossible so long as their government is so divided with Fatah ruling in the west bank and Hamas in Gaza. And with Syria's history of being able to veto any such talks until it gets what it wants, Israeli peace with Syria may be a condition for making peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
So, back to present:
Back channel talks have been going in with Turkey as the intermediary. Turkey has played a wonderful role for years, as a Muslim country that is part of NATO and with a government friendly with Israel. Official negotiators from Israel and Syria have been in Ankara talking with Turkish go between, and possibly with each other. It was announced that they will proceed officially and openly now. Which means that there is some agreed upon framework. One stumbling block in the past has been Syria’s insistence on starting talks where they left off in 2000. Israel said anything agreed to then does not count since there was no final agreement. That seems to be the sort of diplomatic nonsense that is easy to get past once both sides actually want to.
Akiva Elder, Haaretz's senior diplomatic correspondent, nicely summarizes the various specific issues to be negotiated:
[WHERE IS THE BORDER]: The gap between the Syrian and Israeli positions lies in Damascus' demand for an Israeli withdrawal to the July 4, 1967 lines and Jerusalem's stance that any withdrawal must be to the international border.
On the ground, this gap is just several hundred meters, but the sticking point is Syria's demand for land reaching the north-eastern shore of the Kinneret. Unofficial contacts between the two sides via a Swiss channel, which lasted until summer 2006 and were driven by former Foreign Ministry director general Alon Liel, resulted in an agreement that the disputed area between the 1967 lines and the international border would be part of a "peace park" that would cover the entire Golan Heights. The Syrians agreed that Israelis would be able to visit the park during the day without any entry requirements.
[snip]
WATER RESOURCES: Syria, which suffers from water shortages, recently told former U.S. president Jimmy Carter that it is willing to commit that it will not draw water from the Kinneret, but expects financial assistance for desalination plants and a commitment from Turkey that it will supply Syria with water.
EVACUATION OF SETTLEMENTS: In previous contacts between Israel and Syria, a rift emerged between the sides over a timetable for the removal of Israeli communities on the Golan Heights. Israel requested a 15-year period to evacuate settlements, while Syria envisioned a period of ten years for removal of these communities.
SYRIA'S TIES TO IRAN, HEZBOLLAH AND RADICAL PALESTINIAN GROUPS, INCLUDING HAMAS: Israel insisted that Syria commits in advance to sever ties with these parties, while Damascus maintained that this issue should be on the negotiating table with all other issues. In effect, Syria has rejected any preconditions in the talks.
AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT: Syria is standing by its request for U.S. involvement in the negotiations, and wants the U.S. to change its attitude to Damascus and President Bush's inclusion of Syria in the "axis of evil."
DEMILITARIZATION OF SYRIAN TERRITORY EAST OF THE AGREED BORDER: Syria previously demanded that Israel also create a demilitarized zone; an agreement on the extent of the two zones has not yet been reached.
NORMALIZATION OF TIES: Syria backed an Arab League resolution decision first adopted in 2002 at the Beirut conference to normalize ties with Israel in return for a complete withdrawal from all Arab lands captured in 1967. It is unclear if Syria would agree to the normalization requested by Israel before it cedes the West Bank and East Jerusalem as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians.
GOLAN HEIGHTS: The Golan Heights Law which passed in 1981 confirmed Israel's annexation of the Golan. This law could now make it difficult for the government to get the Knesset's approval for settlement evacuation or withdrawal from the Golan Heights. Back in their day, both Rabin and Ehud Barak promised to bring any agreement to a referendum.