An envoy's peace plan

To say that Palestinians and Israelis are caught in a deadlock is an understatement. Since Israel declared itself a state in 1948, there has been an ongoing conflict in the region as a consequence of the Israeli occupation.

Two Arab countries have signed peace treaties with the Jewish state: Egypt and Jordan.

With the latter having established diplomatic relations in 1994, it seems 15 years later prospects for change remain very slim.

After Israel's recent onslaught on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, there is a sense of hopelessness.

One of the Arab world's top diplomats seems to think the situation could change in the near future, not because Israel wishes it, but because the present world order cannot afford not to resolve the Palestine-Israel conflict.

Marwan Muasher, who served as the first Jordanian ambassador to Israel, discusses the state of this region and shares his views in his book, The Arab Center: The Promise of Moderation.

You have said Arab, Israeli and American policies need rethinking. With regard to the Arab political approach, what needs rethinking? (The Arabs have come up with plans, including the Saudi peace initiative which Israel failed to even consider.)

The gradual approach to peacemaking has exhausted its possibilities. The Oslo process was supposed to successfully end in 1999 and establish a Palestinian state. That has not happened.

It is time to move from conflict management to conflict resolution, end the Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Arab lands and establish a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.

The Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 provides a framework that addresses Arab and Israeli needs.

I am glad to see that Israel is showing signs of interest in such a settlement.

Can you outline the shortcomings of America's policies towards the region?

The Bush administration ignored the Arab-Israeli conflict for too long while dealing with the other challenges — Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan — in isolation. That did not work.

The Arab-Israeli conflict is central to all these problems and needs to be solved quickly if the trend of rising radicalism is to be reversed.

When dealing with issues of peace and reform, the United States has also to prove its credibility, which has been badly damaged because of the peace process and the Iraq war.

Isn't it an ongoing cycle? Violence breeds more violence. So if the US uses violence, people in this region will react angrily.

The Bush Administration had tried to deal with the problems as if they were isolated. We have seen the failure of such a policy.

Unless the US adopts a holistic way of looking at the challenges of the region, including the centrality of the Arab-Israeli conflict, these challenges will remain largely unaddressed.

The deadlock in the Middle East peace process is creating “frustration''. What can people look forward to in the coming months, if not years?

It is time to seek a regional settlement between Israel and the Arab world, based on the Arab Peace Initiative, international law and earlier talks.

Only such a settlement can deal with the challenges. The international community, through the Quartet, can play a central role in convening a conference that can effect a settlement without giving much time to the opponents of peace, who have used such time in the past to derail the peace process.

At last year's Fifth Forum for the Future in Abu Dhabi, it was concluded that political reforms are a national demand but the region's future must be decided by its people without tutelage. Do you agree?

Reform does not work if imposed from outside. It must be a home-grown process that can then receive support from the international community.

But Arab moderates have a responsibility to be more vocal in their call for such a process to be initiated in a serious, if gradual, manner.

Many have used the interference from outside as an excuse for not initiating any reform. We must also understand that democracy is more than just free elections.

With regard to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, is there a chance for the one-state solution to succeed?

Options other than a two-state solution are less viable. A one-state solution — a bi-national state with equal rights for Arabs and Israelis — is an outcome Israel will not accept. Israel can choose an indefinite occupation, which would not be acceptable to the international community.

The unilateral withdrawal which it tried in Lebanon and Gaza did not work. Some are talking about the TIME solution.

In 2025, Israel will be surrounded by 380 million Arabs, with an Arab majority in the areas under its control. If the Arabs are pushed towards accepting solutions that only address Israel's needs, more people will talk about this solution.

Please summarise your book in a few words

My book is about Arab moderates, their successes and failures.

It attempts to show, through an account of my experience with the peace process since Madrid, their efforts to bring about a peaceful and lasting end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

It also discusses why the Arab centre is not holding and argues that the centre needs to expand its moderation to areas of concern to Arabs: good governance, political reform, economic well being and cultural diversity.