NEWS ANALYSIS : Arabs, Israelis Cross ‘No, Never’ Lines for Peace

The last of the “no, never” lines of the Arab-Israeli conflict are fast disappearing as an outline for peace emerges dramatically in the Middle East:

* Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization after 29 years of hostility are dealing directly and fruitfully with one another; mutual recognition seems probable within a week or two.

* Israel is ready for the creation of a Palestinian homeland, acknowledging the Palestinian right of self-determination and reversing its own nationalist claims on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In time, it seems, there will be both Israel and Palestine on the Middle East map.

* The Palestinians not only are accepting Israel’s existence and its legitimacy but are also discussing ways to cooperate as they move toward self-government and what most observers are now confident will be independence.

* And Israel’s other Arab neighbors, seeing the prospect of resolving the Palestinian problem, the core issue in the Middle East conflict, are seeking their own deals with the Jewish state.

“With such a rush of changes, one must remember two things. The first is to caution that everything is still quite tentative and could be reversed; the second is not to underestimate the profound character of these developments,” said a veteran Western diplomat who has followed the negotiations closely.

“We are dealing with very tough, very difficult, almost irreducible issues. . . . With those issues resolved, we will have created a new world in the Middle East.”

Although prepared by months of tedious talking in Washington and by secret diplomacy between Israel and the PLO, the changes already are reconfiguring the region’s politics.

Syria, which only a month ago saw itself as the decisive Arab power in reshaping the Middle East, now is scrambling to keep up with the PLO, which seems to have escaped Syrian tutelage. Jordan appears equally miffed at the PLO’s success in dealing directly with Israel.

The United States, regarded as the indispensable broker in the Middle East peace process, found itself on the outside of the talks between Israel and the PLO and is now working to reassert its role.

Containment of Iranian influence and radical Islam, the two most determined opponents of an Arab-Israeli settlement, is now the clear goal of a new alliance of moderates in the Middle East, unexpectedly grouping Israel with its nearest Arab neighbors.

The extent of the changes perhaps is most apparent in the sympathy that Israeli and PLO officials now openly offer for each other in dealing with their hard-line critics. An Israeli official, not joking, commented Tuesday that Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s “closest ally” is now PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat in that their political fates are now linked.

And Sari Nusseibeh, deputy head of the Palestinian negotiating team, commented: “What happened is that we came to see the problems we had before us in terms of each other’s needs, not just our own. If we could satisfy some of Rabin’s needs, then perhaps he could satisfy some of ours.”

The Israeli calculations, outlined by Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, are based on a series of strategic shifts intended to assure the country’s long-term security.

With the rise of radical Islam, the growth of Iranian influence in the Muslim world and the introduction of ballistic missiles and chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons in the Middle East arsenals, Rabin had concluded that the greatest threat to Israel’s existence came not from its immediate neighbors but from farther away.

“In the Arab world, Israel’s place as a threatening dagger has been taken by Iran,” Peres told the Knesset, Israel’s Parliament, earlier this week.

Rabin’s Labor Party had much earlier concluded that to remain a democratic Jewish state, Israel could not incorporate territories with a population of 2 million Palestinians and thus would have to pull back from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Over time, settlement with the Palestinians became the basis for any deal with the other Arabs, according to Israeli officials.

“We are yoked together,” said Jaber Fiddah, a leading pro-PLO politician in the Gaza Strip. “They know that to settle with the others, say Syria, requires them to settle with us, but we clearly have our needs of them as well. . . . This is the character of the Middle East.”

Israeli strategists go further and speak of the country’s Arab neighbors as virtual “buffers” against attacks by more radical states, notably Iran, Iraq and Libya.

A second major “clock” that was ticking in Rabin’s decision to talk with the PLO and then to accede to a Palestinian homeland was his domestic political agenda--plus a desire for a second election victory.

Elected over a year ago on a platform of “peace with security,” Rabin had fallen well behind his timetable of “six to nine months” for Palestinian self-government. That meant he would find it difficult to call new elections to secure a new mandate for full peace--and a new four-year term.

No sooner was the complicated timetable announced for Palestinian autonomy than Israeli political observers began calculating when Rabin might call for new elections to capitalize on the success of an agreement.

For Rabin, who appears driven by the conviction that he alone can conclude a secure peace with the Palestinians and thus lead Israel to a different future, the prolonged stalemate in the negotiations with the Palestinians was a political indictment of his government and himself.

The Palestinians too had a “clock” on which political time was running faster than events.

In entering the Middle East negotiations nearly two years ago, the PLO leadership made promises--of peace, of human rights, of economic prosperity--that were now thrown back at it.

“Arafat needed to show progress--and real progress,” said a critic of the PLO. “Twenty-two months of hotel bills, airplane tickets and press conferences are not what the people had in mind when our representatives sat down with the Israelis.”