Camp David Talks Open With Hope, Warning

With a warning from President Clinton that they have already “passed the point of no return,” Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat on Tuesday opened a Camp David peace summit aimed at ending decades of Mideast conflict.

“The atmosphere is good, and the mood is serious,” White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart told reporters as the three leaders held their first meeting at the secluded Maryland presidential retreat about 60 miles north of the White House.

But the discussions, which U.S. officials hope will produce a landmark agreement like the Camp David accord orchestrated by President Carter in 1978, were immediately shrouded in secrecy. White House officials said they fear that any public disclosures could jeopardize the prospects for a deal.

While the talks could easily extend into next week, Mideast experts predicted that the leaders are likely to determine by the weekend the broad contours of what can be achieved, which will allow them to dedicate the rest of their negotiations to the contentious details.

“All parties will push for the big one, but they’ll have to decide within the first three days whether it can be achieved,” said Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “If not, then they’ll have to decide what they can get in the time left.”

Clinton, Barak and Arafat quickly reached one agreement: They pledged to reveal nothing for now of the substance of their talks. At his first briefing to reporters gathered at the elementary school in this village near Camp David, Lockhart described the length and setting of the meetings but refused to say what was being discussed.

Walking arm in arm into Laurel Cottage, which contains Camp David’s largest meeting rooms, the three leaders paused to permit photographs. But they reinforced the theme of silence.

“We pledged to each other that we would answer no questions and offer no comment, and I’d like to set a good example,” Clinton said in response to a shouted question. Barak and Arafat said nothing.

U.S. officials said leaks of information could not only block progress at the talks but also severely undermine the authority of the Israeli and Palestinian leaders.

Barak’s government is already disintegrating because right-wing members fear that he will make significant concessions without getting enough in return. Any information about when and how compromises are struck would almost certainly increase the pressure on the Israeli leader.

Although Arafat has not been presented with a formal challenge to his authority, Middle East experts said he is facing increasing criticism from Palestinians who fear that he will give in to the Israelis.

Analysts Assess Outcome of Gathering

As the three leaders checked in to their rustic cabins and began talks, Mideast analysts both inside and outside government were busy delineating the fundamental choices facing the three participants and assessing the outcomes.

The daunting gap between the Israelis and Palestinians, the historical forces pulling at both sides, and the poor chemistry between Barak and Arafat have led many analysts to predict that “Camp David II” will produce only a partial accord.

Yet at least half a dozen options are possible, Mideast experts said, including:

* A Complete Peace: The ultimate objective is a sweeping agreement that covers all major outstanding disputes, including the status of Jerusalem, the transfer of land to the Palestinians in exchange for dropping future claims on Israel, and repatriation of Palestinian refugees.

Mideast analysts said this option would be the toughest to negotiate. “The chances of complete success are fairly remote because of big differences and because neither side has the political flexibility to give the other side what it needs,” said Richard Haass, director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington and a former Mideast specialist in the Bush administration.

Yet a full accord could have the best chance of approval by the Israeli public in a post-summit referendum promised by Barak, because it would officially end the conflict. It could prove the most difficult option for Arafat, however, because it probably would require him to back down on long-standing Palestinian demands.

* Everything but Jerusalem: The negotiators could craft a broad agreement on all major issues except the most difficult of them all--the Palestinians’ demand to establish their capital in East Jerusalem. That issue could be left for future talks, possibly to be held after years of de facto coexistence.

“Both sides have taken such rigid positions, with thousands of years of history behind their reasoning, that I don’t see either side giving up on a historic piece of turf both claim,” said Stanley Sheinbaum, former president of the Los Angeles Police Commission and one of five American Jews who persuaded Arafat in 1988 to renounce terrorism and recognize Israel.

This option might appeal to the Palestinians, but it would be hard for Israel to accept.

* Another Interim Accord: The talks could produce a partial pact that merely continues the patchwork process that began with the 1993 Oslo peace accord. It probably would involve lesser concessions by Israel. Analysts said this option is a strong possibility, but it could be hard for Barak and Arafat to sell at home.

“In Arafat’s case, the public can’t stomach any more delays,” said Shibley Telhami, Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland. “He’s promised too much too many times, and patience is running out.”

Barak, who survived a close no-confidence vote Monday in the Israeli parliament, faces similar pressures. Analysts said his political situation is not strong enough to withstand a partial deal that leaves Israel with unresolved vulnerabilities.

* Rolling Summit: The two sides might simply agree to continue sporadic talks through the end of the Clinton administration. This scenario would mask short-term failure and would be a face-saving way of leaving the door open for the next six months. But analysts said this option is not appealing to either the Israelis or the Palestinians.

“The political timetable of each side makes this option difficult,” Telhami said. “Because of the campaign and election, the American political agenda would make it hard to keep reconvening peace talks. . . . [And] Barak couldn’t survive politically until Jan. 21 if all is still up in the air.”

* Negotiated Declaration: If the fundamental disputes cannot be resolved, the leaders could negotiate a “framework” for Arafat to unilaterally declare Palestinian statehood, which he has said he will do Sept. 13 in the absence of a comprehensive peace plan.

This option would be designed to prevent the failed talks from causing an escalation of hostilities between Israel and the newly declared Palestine. Analysts predicted that it is the least that will come out of Camp David, because both sides want to prevent a potentially violent confrontation in the fall.

* Total Breakdown: The United States, Israel and the Palestinian Authority all have warned of the dangers that would accompany complete failure of the talks. This option is considered unlikely because none of the participants wants to leave Camp David with nothing.

“There are a lot of obstacles and a reasonable chance that it could all fall apart,” Telhami said. “Yet the chances for success are higher than failure. Despite differences, the gap has already narrowed significantly on all the big issues, and they already have enough informally for an important breakthrough on a framework, even if they have to defer some of the details.”

Despite the veil of secrecy at the conference site, Israeli and Palestinian officials outside the Camp David delegations generated a steady flow of comments intended to put their own slant on the summit--and the underlying Israeli-Palestinian disputes.

Avraham Burg, speaker of the Israeli parliament, and Hanan Mikhail-Ashrawi, a member of the Palestinian parliament, were among those assigned to make the rounds of television interview shows. Israeli and Palestinian officials who remained in the Middle East also offered their version of the controversy.

Lockhart said Clinton would remain at Camp David overnight Tuesday and would devote all of his time to the summit at least until Thursday, when he plans to address a convention of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People in Baltimore and attend a Medal of Honor award ceremony on Capitol Hill. Lockhart said Clinton has not changed his plan to leave next Wednesday for the Group of 8 summit in Okinawa, Japan.

Lockhart said Clinton met separately Tuesday with Arafat for about 45 minutes and Barak for half an hour on the terrace of Aspin Cottage--the president’s quarters--before moving to Laurel Cottage for the three-way meeting. Much of the first day’s talks were taken up, he said, by Clinton’s attempt to summarize the status of negotiations and outline his understanding of the two sides’ positions.

Although Lockhart provided no details, Clinton made clear his own approach to the talks in a brief statement before he boarded a helicopter Tuesday morning at the White House for the flight to Camp David. “There can be no success without principled compromise,” Clinton said. “The road to peace, as always, is a two-way street.”

Optimism in Israel About an Agreement

In Jerusalem, Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin, one of the original negotiators of the landmark Oslo accords, was optimistic about the chances of a far-reaching agreement.

“The high expectations and hopes make it almost impossible that the prime minister will return without an agreement,” Beilin told a group of foreign reporters. “The prospects are positive, and the will is there, as are the solutions. It is not as though they are dealing with an enigma.”

Palestinian officials were far more pessimistic. Ahmed Korei, the head of the Palestinian Legislative Council who is also known as Abu Alaa, said an agreement was still a distant possibility.

“The positions remain as they are,” he told the Voice of Palestine radio, referring to the distance between the two sides. “The Palestinian position will never change.”

Yasser Abed-Rabbo, a senior Palestinian negotiator, told Israeli radio that, unless Barak agrees to the right of return for more than 3 million Palestinian refugees, “neither eight days of summit nor eight years” will make a difference.

Barak, speaking to reporters on his plane before landing in the U.S., said he expected American negotiators, within the next couple of days, to present “bridging proposals” that would span the gaps between the two sides.

*

Kempster reported from Thurmont, Md., and Wright from Washington. Staff writer Tracy Wilkinson in Jerusalem contributed to this report.