Scepticism over Sharon's policies within Israel

Israeli tanks were withdrawn from the area around Arafat's compound last Monday. The move comes after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's inner security cabinet stressed that Arafat would still be barred from travelling beyond the city of Ramallah, where he has been confined since last December.

Palestinian officials said the failure to lift all restrictions on Arafat was humiliating and, in response, cancelled all security meetings with Israel.

In a televised speech, Sharon made it clear that he was still committed to military action by declaring that Israel would not rest until the "terrorist network" had been destroyed. He outlined a set of conditions to be fulfilled by the Palestinian National Authority before the revival of the negotiations, such as the arrest of the assassins of Tourism Minister Rechavam Ze'evi. The arrest has been one of Sharon's conditions for ending the siege of Arafat's headquarters.

He also said that Israel is to set up buffer zones and obstacles on its borders with the Palestinian territories, without giving further details of the so-called buffer zones which, he said, were intended to increase the security of Israelis. But his main message was an appeal to Israelis to hold firm and united despite the violence.

The Arab press reviewed the Israeli decision and its effects on the peace process in the region. The decision of maintaining the confinement of Arafat is not surprising at all, writes Al Khaleej (UAE) in its editorial comment. Israel is not confining Arafat because he is the president of the Palestinians, but as a punishment because he failed to keep his promises to stop the intifada.

Indeed, Israel was hoping that its military actions and its agreements with the Palestinian National Authority would lead to the end of the Palestinian resistance. As a result, neither Israel's brutal attacks nor the Palestinian National Authority's measures were able to defeat the intifada, adds Al Khaleej.

The Israeli decision aims at humiliating Arafat by putting him in the embarrassing position of having to ask for permission to pass through the borders of Ramallah. This confinement is not just restricted to Arafat, but to all Palestinians, both his partisans and opponents.

It is an attempt to save face in order to cover up its failure. Its greatest humiliation is certainly its inability to counter the intifada despite all its military, economic and political assets, and despite the full support of the world's superpower, says Al Khaleej.

For Israel, a few important repercussions of continuing with Arafat's confinement are reinforcing the unity of the coalition government and preventing Israeli hardliners such as Lieberman from leaving the government. This decision also has a regional impact. It is a message from Sharon to the Arab countries, expressing the power of Israel to impose its decisions on them.

Keeping Arafat confined in Ramallah also means his not able to attend the Arab summit in Beirut, especially since his presence is considered by many Arab countries as the main challenge of the summit. The Israeli decision is also a negative response to Prince Abdullah's peace plan, concludes Al Khaleej.

Asharq Al-Awsat, in its editorial comment, outlines the need for the Israeli government to adopt a new strategy after the failure of its military doctrine. The decision of the Israeli cabinet to lift the siege on Arafat proves the scepticism of the Israeli leadership regarding Sharon's policies. Indeed, Sharon's tactics have done nothing but escalate the crisis, adds Asharq Al-Awsat.

The 17-month-old intifada is still continuing in spite of the daily violence perpetrated by the Israeli army, with no inter-Palestinian confrontation as Sharon had hoped. Throughout their history, Israelis have never felt as unsafe as they are feeling now, says Asharq Al-Awsat.

The Israeli leadership must be more realistic and review its previous policies which have proved inefficient on the ground. Thus, since Sharon became prime minister, he has not achieved any results and, in fact, violence has increased and security diminished, adds Asharq Al-Awsat.

Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz's peace proposal is a step, unthinkable even a year ago, which can be a way out from this situation if Israel proves its good intentions. Such a proposal can be adopted as part of unified Arab principles by the next Arab summit to be held in Beirut in March. This proposal includes normalisation of ties with Israel in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied in 1967.

Arab countries expect more support to their proposal from the American administration, as well as a commitment to launch peace talks, in view of the forthcoming visit of American vice-president, Dick Cheney, to the region, concludes Asharq Al-Awsat.

In its editorial comment, Al Bayan (UAE) points out that Sharon's policies seem confused and ineffectual, and his decision not to lift the siege on Arafat shows his obvious disdain of the international community. He has no other alternative but to destroy any opportunity of making peace with the Palestinians, adds Al Bayan.

In fact, Sharon had promised that Arafat may be released following the Palestinian arrest of three men from the Popular Front For The Liberation of Palestine, for the murder of Rehavam Ze'evi. The three men have been arrested and yet Arafat is still under siege in Ramallah. Sharon has opted for provocation and his attitude will only lead the region to more war and bloodshed, says Al Bayan.

Israel should not only lift the siege on Arafat but on all the Palestinians by putting an end to the closure of the Palestinian territories and cities. Failure to do so will only intensify the war in the region. This situation requires a swift and effective move from the Arab countries during the Arab summit, and a firm international stand that can enforce the UN resolutions, concludes Al Bayan.

Hazem Saghiyeh, writing in Al Hayat (UK-based), discusses the dead end Sharon's brutal strategy has reached and the U.S.'s determination to support his policies by receiving him in Washington.

The Palestinian National Authority is still in place regardless of the siege and the destruction of its infrastructure. Europe, in spite of its ineffectual role in the peace process, reiterated its firm stand regarding the Middle East. By adopting the proposal of Prince Abdullah the Arabs will be in a position to work towards bringing peace to the region.

Most of the above mentioned facts are positive and can constitute a broad strategy towards the achievement of peace. To do so, three important goals should be achieved: removing Sharon from the political scene as he has proved his incapability as a peace negotiator; an end to Palestinian attacks against civilians, especially within Israel itself; and the need for more positive and direct intervention from the U.S. to bring back Israel to the negotiating table, something that nobody can guarantee, not even Europe, adds Saghiyeh.

The common denominator here is Israeli public opinion, which should be reinforced to play a more effective role in achieving these targets. Thus, Israeli public opinion is the only thing capable of overthrowing Sharon's government and it is also the most