It's good to talk
Wednesday, 03 Dec 2008 10:57
New leaders could rejuvenate the Middle East peace process
The roots to a Middle Eastern peace settlement could lie in rural Oxfordshire.
It may sound surprising, but this is where senior Israeli and Arab officials have been meeting thanks to the committed work of the Oxford Research Group's Gabrielle Rifkind.
Her mediating skills have resulted in another track towards a two-state solution being put forward which is gaining serious political momentum behind the scenes.
"If you are interested in ending conflict you have to understand people's motivations," she says.
"Whether it's an insurgency or an intifada – you have to look at what lies beneath the actual overt behaviour. To understand the political agenda you have to understand people's motivation."
The problem
Over a year has passed since the Annapolis peace talks raised hopes of a new agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians. A two-state solution seems as far off as ever.
The resumption of negotiations struggled to make progress because, while working out the details, it failed to resolve the fundamental disputes which stand in the way of progress.
As disillusionment grows about this approach to the problem, an alternative is beginning to gain popularity in Middle Eastern circles.
Six years have passed since the 22 nations of the Arab League put forward a peace initiative to Jerusalem. Under the proposed deal relations with Israel would be normalised.
In return an independent Palestinian state with a capital in east Jerusalem would be established. Israel would return to its pre-1967 borders. And refugees would be given a fair right to return.
At the time Israel's politicians rejected it out of hand. Now, however, there is a suggestion it may be time to revisit this proposal.
Israel's domestic politics is currently in a state of flux. Foreign minister Tzipi Livni's failure to create a viable coalition following the early exit of prime minister Ehud Olmert has led to elections being called for February. No major decisions can be taken until then, meaning now is a time for unusual introspection about the way forward for senior Israeli policymakers.
It's a real opportunity for alternatives to be put forward and seriously assessed. With a new president soon to take office in the White House, change is firmly on the agenda. The only question is: what form will it take?
The person
Ms Rifkind may hold the answer. Not that she is a politician; when it comes to committee meetings she freely confesses to not being very "strategic". Instead her background lies in working with the human mind.
"I worked in the field of psychology for 25 years," she says. "But I'd always wanted to find a use for what I learned in politics. I'm interested more in natural, creative ways of trying to make a contribution to the resolution of conflict."
That's why if there's one thing Ms Rifkind hates it's the stuffy, formal environment of suited-and-booted conferences in cities. There are no five-star hotels in her methodology. Instead of stressed-out city centres she takes her guests to the countryside – to Oxfordshire – where differences can be resolved in more relaxed surroundings.
"It's perhaps a little surprising to some people," she muses. "A place where there's lovely walks, beautiful countryside. We take our own cook."
Visions of Israelis and Palestinians bursting into tears and embracing each other swim in front of my mind. I suggest as much to Ms Rifkind, who is quick to disillusion me. "There's a hard political reality to it," she warns. "It's not the contact which is going to shift them."
On October 15th to 17th Ms Rifkind's most recent meeting took place. Saudi prince Turki al-Faisal headed the list of luminaries on the Arab side of the table, which also included representatives from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries. Senior Israeli officials were present on the other side.
The result was impressive: last week Ms Rifkind's report noted renewed interest in the Arab peace initiative as holding real potential.
In a foreword to the report Prince Turki suggested promising scope for progress existed. He wrote: "The positive response of the Israelis who joined the discussion is an encouraging sign that, as Israelis become more aware of the quid pro quo offered by the initiative, will see the great opportunity that this vision of a final and definitive peace between Israel and the Arab world offers."
Trade secrets
How did Ms Rifkind achieve this? Getting beyond the platitudes and rhetoric is a start. "I'm quite skilled at trying to unlock that and trying to get people to move from their fixed positions," she reveals. "It's all about the culture you try and create – you want a different kind of conversation to that which people have when they've got their official hats on."
The mechanics of organising the meetings in the first place takes up much of her time. As human rights coordinator for the Middle East Ms Rifkind freely admits the need for a well-thumbed contact book.
Sometimes the outbreak of war gets in the way of her work. Don't even mention the Israeli-Hizbullah conflict of 2006, which prompts a wince. Her efforts to set up an Israel-Hamas meeting were utterly derailed. "It doesn't always come off," she admits. Still, that makes it all the more satisfying when it does.
Ms Rifkind hopes her work will foster more open dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians. In the current political climate in Israel, it may even contribute to a renewed push for peace under the auspices of the Arab peace plan.
That's not bad going for any individual trying to make an impact on world affairs. With the assistance of the ORG, which organises work along these lines all around the world, Ms Rifkind may be doing exactly that.
"I profoundly believe that in the end conflict is created by humans and can only be resolved by humans," she says. "And so any contribution one can make to that is satisfying enough. I think it's easier to find a way to be involved than not."
Gabrielle Rifkind was talking to Alex Stevenson