Shamir Proposes Arab Vote to Resurrect Peace Process

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, scorning as “deception” the land-for-peace formula favored by the Bush Administration, Thursday proposed elections in the occupied territories to choose Arabs willing to negotiate details of limited Palestinian self-rule.

Shamir outlined his proposal to revive the moribund Middle East peace process during an hourlong meeting with President Bush in the White House.

He said elections in the occupied territories would “launch a political negotiating process.” But he emphasized that the first phase of the talks would not go beyond the “autonomy” plan adopted 11 years ago in the Camp David accords and never implemented because of opposition from Palestinians who called it inadequate.

Bush gave the Shamir proposal a carefully qualified endorsement.

“The United States believes that elections in the territories can be designed to contribute to a political process of dialogue and negotiation,” he said.

A senior Administration official said later that it is impossible to tell whether Shamir’s plan will lead to progress because the Israeli prime minister has not yet formulated the details of how it would work.

Other U.S. officials said that Bush’s strategy is to give the Israeli government time to try out its proposals. If the plan fails, the officials said, the United States could offer additional ideas of its own.

Bush carefully avoided overt criticism of Shamir’s approach. But the President said that Washington will not support “Israeli sovereignty over, or permanent occupation of, the West Bank and Gaza.” At the same time, he said, the United States will not support “an independent Palestinian state” either.

Former President Ronald Reagan proposed creation of a Palestinian homeland on the West Bank and Gaza Strip in confederation with Jordan. The Bush Administration has hinted that it would be receptive to that proposal or, perhaps, to another plan that would end Israeli control over the territories without creating a fully independent state.

Both Bush and Shamir were lavish in their praise of U.S.-Israeli relations. Bush said that the two nations are “friends, strategic partners and allies.” Shamir said: “Our two nations share the values and ideals of the free world and the ideals of democracy and freedom.”

Signs of Friction

Nevertheless, there were signs of friction. Shamir flatly rejected American calls for Israel to relax its military occupation as a confidence-building gesture toward the Palestinians.

“I don’t think we have to give any guarantees to the Arabs,” Shamir said after making a speech sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. “I don’t think we have to take any measures for confidence.”

Shamir also insisted that Israel will not be pressured to yield the territories it seized during the Six-Day War in 1967 in exchange for a peace treaty with its Arab neighbors. The Bush Administration, like its predecessor, supports the land-for-peace approach.

“The slogan ‘territories for peace’ is a hoax,” said Shamir in the prepared text of his speech. When he delivered the speech, Shamir softened “hoax” to “deception.”

At the White House, Shamir outlined what he called a “four-point peace initiative.” But the first three points suggested actions that other parties should take to improve their relations with Israel. The fourth point was the West Bank and Gaza election plan.

“To launch a political negotiating process, we propose free democratic elections, free from an atmosphere of PLO violence, terror and intimidation, among the Palestinian Arabs of Judea, Samaria (the Biblical names for the West Bank) and Gaza,” Shamir said. “Their purpose is to produce a delegation to negotiate an interim period of self-governing administration.

“The shape of modalities and participation in the elections will have to be discussed,” Shamir said.

Shamir said later that the election would be open only to Palestinian candidates willing to accept an interim period of autonomy until a final settlement is negotiated. That formula was accepted by Egypt, Israel and the United States at the Camp David conference of 1978, which led to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty signed in 1979. But the formula did not take effect because Israel was unable to find any Palestinian leaders willing to talk about it.

The Palestine Liberation Organization has said that it will try to disrupt any West Bank and Gaza elections supervised by the Israeli military. But the organization has indicated that it might support elections that take place under the auspices of the United Nations or some other international organization.

Shamir flatly rejected any outside supervision of the voting. He said that Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East, is capable of carrying out elections.

Shamir said that his nation will insist on an interim period of limited self-rule to “provide a vital test of coexistence and cooperation.” But he promised that Israel would not try to make the plan permanent. Arab critics of the Camp David formula have complained that it would permit Israel to control the territories forever while leaving the Palestinians with little more than the right to collect their own garbage.

Bush, hoping to quiet Arab fears, underlined Shamir’s pledge.

“The prime minister assured me that Israel is committed to negotiating an agreement on final status that is satisfactory to all sides, and he made it clear that interim arrangements on Palestinian self-rule are not the end of the road,” Bush said. “I’m encouraged by the prime minister’s assurance that all options are open for negotiation.”

Shamir said that Israel would negotiate “without preconditions” on a final settlement. He said that the Arab parties would be free to bring up anything they wished at those negotiations. But he made it clear that Israel would never agree to accept a Palestinian state that could serve as “a convenient launching pad for terrorist attacks against the center of our country.”

In response to Palestinian demands for national self-determination, Shamir said: “We want them to be able to express their national aspirations through the Palestinian state on the east bank of the Jordan,” a reference to the kingdom of Jordan.