Ha'aretz Editorial, 24.08.07

As the regional summit sponsored by the U.S. president approaches, signs are growing that Israel's senior political leadership wants the initiative to succeed. The preparatory work in Jerusalem, alongside the meetings with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, suggest that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Vice Premier Haim Ramon and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni recognize that the success of the conference depends on being able to produce an Israeli-Palestinian document of principles. To this end, they are willing to deal with final-status issues, including sensitive ones whose discussion was banned by Ariel Sharon, founder of their Kadima Party. Sharon's senior adviser, Dov Weissglas, explained that the disengagement would act like "formaldehyde" and ensure "there will be no diplomatic process with the Palestinians."
The failures of the Second Lebanon War and the establishment of a Hamas government, followed by a Palestinian unity government, moved the West Bank convergence plan - Kadima's flagship political program - to the bottom of the agenda. The policy-makers evidently understood that Fatah's disengagement from Hamas and the fear that Hamas might also seize control of the West Bank presented Israel not only with opportunities, but also with risks. The new circumstances in the territories and the Arab League initiative require the political leadership not to miss any opportunities. They obligate it to show courage and initiative in formulating understandings that will bring about the prompt establishment of a Palestinian state, a resolution of the issue of Jerusalem and a solution to the refugee problem that would be implemented outside Israel's borders.
Yesterday's Haaretz report about the proposal being formulated in Jerusalem for a safe passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in any agreement on territorial exchange reflects a correct and balanced approach. Such an arrangement could serve Israel's interest in annexing the settlement blocs close to the Green Line and bolster the pragmatists in the West Bank and Gaza. Such solutions have been discussed in official forums and in the negotiations that Ehud Barak's government conducted with the Palestinians, as well as in semi-official frameworks such as the Geneva Initiative.
Although officially, the framework that President Bill Clinton presented to the parties in December 2000 is not binding, itsformulas could be used to bridge differences on every aspect of the final-status negotiations. It would be best to utilize the short period remaining before the summit to adjust these formulas to the new circumstances on the ground in the territories. The prime minister should appoint a Peace Administration made up of a small team of experts who have experience from previous talks with the Palestinians.
The achievement of an Israeli-Palestinian understanding on final-status issues would probably expand participation in the summit to include key players such as Saudi Arabia and other Arab states, who would give further credibility to a document of principles. Kadima leaders should not be deterred by the criticism they will absorb from the right. They have a public mandate and a solid parliamentary majority to fulfill their obligation to end the occupation and ensure that Israel remains a Jewish and democratic state.