By Adam Hanieh
Events in recent weeks have demonstrated that the Oslo process is not contingent on the wishes of particular Israeli political parties, but central to imperialism's designs for the Middle East.
On November 30, Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and his cabinet declared Israel's willingness to implement a second pullback from the West Bank. Cabinet also described a process by which a senior ministerial panel would recommend which security zones, settlement areas, water resources and other strategic interests should not be yielded in the final status agreements. The panel will be comprised of Netanyahu, foreign minister David Levy, defence minister Yitzhak Mordechai and national infrastructure minister Ariel Sharon.
The declaration came after weeks of pressure from the United States for Netanyahu and his ministers to move the withdrawal process forward. In Levy's words: "The government must declare its unambiguous commitment to moving the peace process forward and fulfil its obligations, such as the second pullback. Only with a clear position can we obtain the support of the United States."
The Israeli and US vision of the final settlement has been clear from the beginning of the Oslo process — Israeli control of around 70% of the territories that were occupied in 1967, with nominal Palestinian control over the remaining 30%. Israel will control security zones on the western and eastern sides of the West Bank, as well as the extensive settlement areas already in place.
With this aim, Israel has constructed settlements on hill tops overlooking Palestinian towns along three major east-west axes. The two largest are Gush Etzion and Gush Adumim.
Gush Etzion, south of Bethlehem, has a projected population of 35,000. Its size and the construction of roads linking it to Jerusalem, other settlements in the Jordan Valley and the Kiryat Arba settlement near Hebron, divide the southern part of the West Bank, in particular the major Palestinian towns of Bethlehem and Hebron.
Gush Adumim, with a population of more than 20,000 is the largest settlement bloc in the West Bank. It links Jerusalem with settlements in the Jordan Valley.
A third bloc of settlements lying south-west of Nablus completes the division of the West Bank into three Palestinian cantons centring around Jenin and Nablus, Ramallah, and Hebron.
This vision of the West Bank was codified in the Allon plan which guided Israeli settlement policy under the Labor party administration from 1967-77. It was augmented with plans drawn up by Ariel Sharon, then in 1997 Netanyahu announced his Allon-plus plan.
Ironically, the difficulties in implementing this plan have been caused, not by the left or the PLO, but by the large Israeli religious right, which views anything short of expulsion of all Palestinians from the Occupied Territories as a violation of their "God-given rights".
Netanyahu's rhetoric against the Oslo Accords was largely aimed at this community and won him their support in the May, 1996 election. The resulting ruling coalition was based on an uneasy balance of the religious right, newly arrived immigrant parties and Netanyahu's Likud party.
There are now signs that this coalition is fracturing. Following Netanyahu's declaration of support for the pullback, posters depicting him in an Arab head-dress appeared in Jerusalem, and right-wing demonstrations were held in several cities. These protests may, however, be short-lived due to the Israeli Labor Party declaring support for the proposed pullback .
Sharon, who has for a long time been strongly supported by the settler community, has emerged as a key figure in the current situation. His role in the proposed pullback could guarantee the settlers' support. Sharon also has close ties to Israeli business representatives and the US government, which has held several meetings with him in recent months.
The problem that remains for the Israeli government, however, is how to force the Palestinian people to accept the final status maps it envisions.
The Palestinian leaders have displayed contradictory responses to the Israeli pullback proposal. While welcoming another pullback, they have criticised the extent of it (6-8%) as too small.