Am I optimistic about the prospects of a Syrian-Israeli peace deal? How can I afford not to be? A state of perpetual war is not a sustainable alternative. For much too long Syria was in a state of suspended animation as a disproportionate amount of energy and resources were spent in battling external threats. The threat posed by Israel was certainly a real concern, but it was also often conflated to justify the stifling restrictions imposed on the Syrian people by their own government. Consequently, the absence of peace has meant that Syria, as a nation and as a society, has not been able to achieve its full human and economic potential.

Optimism aside, one must ask the question as to why, at this very troubled, evolving and unpredictable time have the two adversaries chosen to start peace talks? Cynics and conspiracy theorists will concoct numerous scenarios about who forcing is forcing whom into peace talks. However, it seems to me to be a decision made by the parties concerned, each for its own reasons, with little outside influence. Clearly, the American administration, stubbornly intent on isolating Syria, was unhappy about this development and discouraged the Israelis from engaging Syria. Just how out of touch the U.S. administration has become with the reality on the ground was evident in Bush’s “I am more Zionist that thou” speech to the Knesset in which he railed against talking to “terrorists” and their supporters. It is the reason why Turkey, and not the U.S., is the intermediary in these talks.

As a Syrian, what I would like to see as part of this settlement is simple: Land for peace. That is, the return of the Golan Heights in return for peace. Demilitarizing the borders is a reasonable compromise but it is the people of the Golan who will decide what if anything (ie: Peace park) will happen to the Heights. Normalizing of relations including opening of borders and trade should be a gradual process, perhaps linked to parallel progress on the Palestinian-Israeli track.

The more difficult part of a Syrian-Israeli settlement is how, or dare I say if, such a settlement can or should be linked to a comprehensive settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The Syrian government, over the years, has prided itself with its steadfastness in its insistence on an overall settlement or none at all. It is in many ways a reflection of the Syrian people’s deep and sincere empathy with the Palestinian people.
The Palestinian issue, despite the neocons’ attempts to make it irrelevant, remains critical to the long term stability of the Middle East. Yet the political landscape has changed dramatically over the last thirty years. Few Arab governments bother to talk about a united strategy to confront Israel. Several Arab countries have negotiated separate settlements with Israel. Moreover, much of the lip service paid in the past by Arab governments to Arab unity and the Palestinian cause was just political posturing; it never benefited the Palestinians. It is therefore not surprising that, rightly or wrongly, the Palestinians finally went their own way with Oslo.

It remains to be seen, then, if the Syrian government is willing or able to leverage its Hamas, Hizbullah, Iran connections to get more than just the Golan Heights, to get some concession that would benefit the Palestinians. It is hard to see how that is possible at this point. It is intriguing to note that the announcement of Syrian-Israeli negotiations occurred as the Egyptians are mediating talks between Hamas and Israel and Nasrallah’s announcement of an exchange of prisoners with Israel suggest the occurrence of secret Israeli-Hizbullah negotiations. Whether these events are directly or indirectly related, perhaps they provide the Syrians government with the political cover to pursue a purely Syrian peace track with Israel.

The big question on the Israeli side remains whether the Israeli government’s commitment to the Syria track will survive Olmert’s eventual demise, a casualty of the serial corruption scandals facing him. Even if survives, he faces the daunting task of convincing two thirds of the Israeli public that giving back the Golan Heights for peace is a good idea.