The attempts now being made to revive the "road map" to a final settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the creation of a Palestinian state are at only a preliminary stage. The recent international conference in London, aimed at supporting reforms in the Palestinian Authority and shoring up support for renewed negotiations with Israel, is one of those preliminary efforts.
I suggest, however, that it is not mediation that is needed: what the Palestinians need now are partners. In their conflict with Israel, their natural and historical partner has always been Jordan.
That partnership was never broken. Articles 3 and 8 of Jordan's peace treaty with Israel refer explicitly to the refugee problem as one of the major issues still to be resolved, as well as citing the unresolved status of trans-border arrangements and of Jerusalem. Jordan is not outside the peace process, but an essential part of it.
The original road map sketched out at the Madrid Conference in 1991 envisaged two stages: the final settlement of disputes between the Palestinians and Israel, and the permanent settlement of regional conflicts. Jordan's participation in both stages is crucial.
Indeed, the interests of the inhabitants of the three areas -- Palestine, Jordan, and Israel -- are so intertwined that their representatives will have no choice but to come to terms with one another if negotiations are to succeed. For example, the refugee problem cannot be separated from wider problems concerning the integration of all inhabitants of Palestine, Jordan and Israel -- where the refugees are most numerous -- into civil societies where they may enjoy equal legal status and equal access to economic and cultural opportunities.
Such integration cannot be achieved on a unilateral basis but only by programs adopted by the host and donor countries in co-operation with each other; nor can it be achieved in conditions where there is complete political and administrative separation between the populations which places them under exclusive controls and fails to acknowledge the human needs of community and conviviality.
The economic and social development of the three areas demands an integrated approach to the exploitation of energy and other natural resources, particularly water. Without agreements on the conditions of such exploitation there will remain imbalances of living conditions and the persistence of rival claims with their potential for future conflicts.
A recognized community of water and energy interests and programs for their joint exploitation, for example in the rift valley, may lead, as was the motivation for the first stage of European integration, to a wider integration on a wider scale in the region.
The status of Jerusalem is still an unresolved question on both the local and international scenes. That question was specifically listed in the Jordanian-Israel Peace Treaty. The recognition by the three parties of the primacy of the moral and spiritual over the political importance of the city could lead to arrangements on the ground which satisfy the legitimate claims of the three Abrahamic faiths, and subsume the eventual political status of the city to this moral authority.
The alternative to an accepted resolution of their problems by the three parties is the permanent fragmentation of the Holy Land, which can only lead to more confrontation and violent conflicts. The shadow of such fragmentation, with its unfathomable perils, now hangs over Iraq. In this troubled part of the world, the choice is, quite simply, one between regionalism and barbarism.
Prince El Hassan bin Talal is the president of the Club of Rome, moderator of the World Conference of Religions for Peace, and the president of the Arab Thought Forum.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS