A Saudi Prince of Peace?
The latest dreadful escalation of the Palestinian conflict involving more than 100 tanks in a single operation has given greater urgency to the recent Saudi peace plan to end the conflict. Some time ago, Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Azis al Saud, the kingdom's effective ruler, aired his peace plan through The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. In simple terms, Prince Abdullah's proposed that in return for the recognition of Israel as an independent state, it must give up all the Arab territories it occupied during the 1967 war. Naturally, the plan involves the recognition of an independent Palestinian state.
Abdullah's plan is essentially based on UN Resolution 242, adopted on Nov. 22, 1967. Its main architect was the United Kingdom's permanent representative at the UN. Ambassador Roeslan Abdulgani, the Indonesian permanent representative at the world body, likes to refer to Resolution 242 as "a triumph of the English language". The fact that 35 years after it was passed that resolution is still relevant, however, shows that the document has some durable elements besides its being couched in the flexibility of the English language. Some skeptics refer to the Abdullah proposal as some sort of "charm campaign" to remedy Saudi Arabia's international image which has suffered after it has turned out that a number of its citizens were involved in the horrible events of Sept. 11 last year.
It is clear that a number of points are left unmentioned, perhaps deliberately, in the Abdullah proposal. For instance on Jerusalem: Should it be divided or jointly administered? And what to do about the new Israeli settlements: should they all be phased out or can a number of them still be tolerated? And what about the Palestinian refugees who are now scattered in a number of countries: Resolution 242 affirms the necessity "for achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem". It is the working out of this phrase "a just settlement" that needs some innovative ideas and the understanding of all the parties concerned.
In any case, even assuming that the Abdullah plan is a cunning public relations stunt to improve Saudi Arabia's image, it was surprisingly positively received in many quarters. Even Syria did not reject it off-hand, so that it can be expected that the Arab League summit, which convenes later this month, will also give its support.
However, given the drastic escalation of the Palestinian conflict in which Israel is virtually engaged in a full-scale military operation, some urgent interim solution must be worked out soon. Former U.S. secretary of state Dr. Henry Kissinger apparently has some ideas about such an arrangement pending an overall peace plan based on Prince Abdullah's proposal. Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak has met with President George Bush at the White House and had a lengthy discussion with Secretary of State Colin Powell. President Bush has dispatched retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, his special Middle East envoy, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has stated before a Security Council meeting his deep concern over the deteriorating situation in the Middle East.
Surely, an interim arrangement can be forged on the basis of these elements to stop the wanton killings that are now going on. At the same time, the U.S. should marshal its vast resources, diplomatic and otherwise, to work out a relevant solution on the basis of the Abdullah plan.
It is difficult to imagine that Vice President Dick Cheney's current visit to the Middle East to urge Arab leaders to back Washington's plan to carry out a "regime change" in Baghdad will succeed if the U.S. does not come up with a credible plan to facilitate a solution to the Palestinian conflict. Washington must convincingly show to the Arab leaders that it is putting its plan for a regime change in Baghdad and achieving peace in the Middle East on the same level of urgency.