RABIN’S LEGACY : Surest Way to a Lasting Peace

The shocking assassination of Yitzhak Rabin marks a sad watershed in Israeli history. It also marks a turning point in the Middle East peace process--a process for which Rabin, a man of immense personal and political courage, deserves great credit.

Any peace that emerges will be Rabin’s legacy. But the bullets that cut down his life also cut short his heartfelt work for peace--and the future of that peace is now in doubt.

How Israel heals its political wounds; the extent to which the Arab world combats its own extremists; the decisions of Syrian President Hafez Assad, and the intensity of U.S. engagement will determine whether full, complete and comprehensive peace emerges. Events could break either way, creating a Middle East peace that fulfills the vision of Rabin the statesman, or, more darkly, spiraling into a new cycle of violence by extremists, leaving the enmity and conflict familiar to Rabin the soldier.

His death leaves an immense void in many ways, not the least of which is the personal loss felt by those of us who knew him well. He was my close friend and trusted colleague, a man who could knock back scotches while knocking together diplomatic agreements, all the while maintaining his famously wry smile. Above all, he was a towering leader who could change as the world changed around him, and who tried steadfastly to shape it for the better.

In a region of paradoxes, he was the most paradoxical of men. He was a soldier willing to trade away territory he had conquered in a brilliant and swift military campaign in exchange for peace. He was a statesman who made peace with Palestinians whose bones had been broken during his iron-fisted tenure as defense minister. And he was a politician who formed an effective alliance with a man, Shimon Peres, he had once loathed as his most bitter political rival.

Now, Peres must soldier on alone. His task will not be easy. But we should not underestimate Peres as a politician or a peacemaker. His previous tenure as Israel’s prime minister in the mid-1980s was successful: His government contained inflation and withdrew the Israeli Defense Force from the Lebanon quagmire.

No one can match Rabin’s legendary accomplishments as the military hero of the Six-Day War. Yet, Peres distinguished himself in the defense ministry by bolstering Israel’s defenses and ensuring the qualitative military advantage it has maintained to this day. Most recently, Peres was the driving force behind the Oslo agreements that brought peace with the Palestinians. His reputation as a dreamy visionary is belied by his negotiation of the 400 pages of Oslo II.

Nonetheless, his first task will be to heal the gaping wound in Israeli society and politics. This was not an assassination by a madman, but the logical extension of the verbal violence that has come to characterize Israeli politics. It is sadly ironic that this most extralegal of acts--a coldblooded political killing--was undertaken by a 25-year-old law student who insists he was saving Israel by killing its duly elected and first native-born prime minister. That is symptomatic of the extent that civil discourse in Israel has been turned on its head. Indeed, while secretary of state, I was the subject of specific threats from a fanatic organization of extremists that used virulent rhetoric to make its case.

Like America following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Israel has lost its innocence. Predictably, the murder has put hard-line right-wingers on the defensive. That will give Peres some breathing space, and Rabin’s martyrdom can become a potent symbol for galvanizing national reconciliation and the peace process. But Peres will need to move quickly to isolate the far-right extremists who believe their ends justify violent means. He needs to make clear that it’s not enough for Likud to distance itself from the extremists. Likud needs to condemn the hate-mongers--publicly and consistently.

The question is not so much whether the center will hold in Israeli politics as whether the silent majority in favor of land for peace will now stand up and be counted. If they don’t, the fissures in Israeli society are likely to widen as the country heads toward elections and the heated rhetoric they naturally generate.

Peres will also have to be a man in a hurry when it comes to the peace process. The Oslo agreements have made peace with the Palestinians almost irreversible, provided those agreements are implemented effectively. But in the Middle East, nothing is easy. There will be plenty of tough sledding as Israeli troops redeploy; Palestinian elections take place, and final status negotiations begin.

Arab extremism is equally dangerous. The brave and stalwart presence of King Hussein of Jordan and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt at Rabin’s funeral exemplifies the strength of Arab moderates. But both men, as leaders whose lives were irrevocably altered by political assassination, remind us that violence as a political instrument in the Middle East knows no boundaries. The threat that Arab radicals pose to the fledgling Palestinian Authority is no less real than the threat Yigal Amir posed to Rabin.

For the true conflict in the Middle East is no longer between Arab and Israeli but between moderates and extremists on both sides. In the wake of Rabin’s death, terrorism will undoubtedly increase--and not just in Israel and the Occupied Territories. The failed assassination attempt against Mubarak earlier this year is symbolic of the broader threats to peace.

Syria remains the missing piece of the puzzle. Rabin, quite understandably, had orchestrated the negotiations with Damascus himself, and his loss will be felt most immediately on the Israeli-Syrian track. Assad is tough and tenacious, and can turn the simplest issue into an endurance contest and test of wills. Having spent tens of hours just to persuade him to permit Syrian participation in face-to-face talks with Israel in 1991, I know firsthand it takes time to gain his trust. But as Rabin once told me, “He’s a tough and wily negotiator, but if you reach an agreement with him, he’ll stick with the letter of the deal.”

Now, Assad is likely to step back and assess the direction of Israeli politics before he makes further significant moves. That is likely to throw the Syrian track into even greater gridlock. It also creates a problem for the peace process as a whole--for without peace between Syria and Israel, there can be no comprehensive and lasting peace.

The task of revitalizing the Syrian-Israeli track will fall on Washington. Secretary of State Warren Christopher has already logged many hours on this problem. He’ll need to make it a top priority, and President Bill Clinton will have to play a more involved role than he has so far. As much as anything, Rabin’s tragic death reveals the fragility of the peace effort in the region and the continued need for active U.S. engagement. Congress should support the Administration’s efforts--first of all, by approving desperately needed funding for the Palestinians.

U.S.-Israeli relations have always been as much about our rich historical, cultural and personal bonds as about diplomatic discourse. This April, Americans were shocked that “one of us” could detonate a bomb and blow up the federal building in Oklahoma City. Last week, Israelis saw “one of us” kill the prime minister. As citizens of the world’s oldest democracy, we must come together to support the Israeli people as they work to ensure that democracy, not demagoguery, and peace, not conflict, triumph.

Rabin has received many testimonials, and memorials, and will receive many more. But the most fitting memorial for a man of his stature would be the renewal of tolerance and civility in Israel and a true, lasting peace in the Middle East.*