The deal for peace that almost was

WASHINGTON — To the catalog of missed opportunities for peace in the Middle East, we can add a tantalizing if also depressing chapter: Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s secret offer in 2008 to create a Palestinian state that would feature international control of holy sites in a divided Jerusalem — a concession many Israelis have said was impossible.

Condoleezza Rice discusses the Olmert proposal in her new memoir, “No Higher Honor.” She writes that as she listened to Olmert’s plan during a May 2008 visit to Israel, she asked herself (and the emphatic italics are hers in the text): “Am I really hearing this? … Concentrate. Write this down. No, don’t write it down. What if it leaks? It can’t leak; it’s just the two of us.”

As Rice tells the story, Olmert developed a comprehensive plan, which he presented secretly to Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, in the summer of 2008. By September, the details of Olmert’s offer included:

•Israeli transfer of sovereignty of 94.2 percent of the West Bank to the new Palestinian state. He offered additional swaps of land, and a corridor linking the West Bank and Gaza, that would bring the total Palestinian land area to 100 percent of the pre-1967 borders of the West Bank.

A formula for dividing Jerusalem that would give Arab neighborhoods to the Palestinians and Jewish neighborhoods to Israel, with negotiators working out the status of mixed neighborhoods. Each country would have Jerusalem as its capital; there would be a joint city council with an Israeli mayor and a Palestinian deputy mayor.

The Old City would be administered by an international committee with representatives from Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the European Union and the United States. Questions of sovereignty in Jerusalem would be fudged, with each side rejecting the other’s claims.

The “right of return” for Palestinians would be limited to about 5,000. To compensate other Palestinian refugees, a fund of several billion dollars would be created, under Norwegian administration.

The U.S. would protect Israel’s security not just with American power but by training a reliable Palestinian security force.

And what happened to this miraculous package? Because it’s the Middle East, you know the answer: It died, with the United States on the sidelines hoping and praying, but Olmert and Abbas too weak politically to take the leap.

The collapse came the moment it seemed to become real. In September 2008, Olmert showed Abbas a map charting the boundaries of the new state. According to Rice, he asked Abbas to sign the deal on the spot, but the Palestinian leader balked and asked to consult his experts first. Olmert wouldn’t let him take a copy of the map, and the follow-up meeting never happened.

President Bush tried to revive the deal when the leaders separately visited Washington in November and December, but by then Olmert was under investigation for corruption charges, and Abbas apparently decided he could get a better deal with a Democratic president. “The conditions were almost ripe for a deal on our watch, but not quite,” writes Rice.

What followed this near miss? That’s the most depressing part of the story. Rice kept mum, but she gave the new administration details of Olmert’s offer, including a State Department version of the map. She hoped the U.S. would use Olmert’s plan as a building block for negotiations — and perhaps even submit it to the U.N. Security Council.

But in one of President Obama’s biggest mistakes, he decided to start negotiations all over — and to demand an Israeli settlement freeze as a test of wills. What a mistake. He was outfoxed by Benjamin Netanyahu, the new Israeli prime minister. Three years later, the peace process is a lifeless corpse.

Rice says she decided to go public with the Olmert plan now because “we’ve gone so far backward” that the peace process seems like “a lost cause.” The lesson of the Olmert gambit, she explained in an interview, is that “an Israeli-Palestinian deal is doable, but they can’t keep missing opportunities.”

Back when she organized the Annapolis peace conference in November 2007, Rice was criticized as overoptimistic. But there was more to the process than many commentators realized. I suspect all the parties would like to rewind the tape to Annapolis — most especially, the Israelis.

Olmert’s map, now dust in the wind, may be the best formula we’ll ever get for the peaceful creation of the Palestinian state that will cement Israel’s own security.

David Ignatius is a Washington Post columnist. His email address is davidignatius@washpost.com.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

Editorial: A win for vote-by-mail, amid gathering concern

A judge preserved the state’s deadline for mailed ballots, but more challenges to voting are ahead.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, Jan. 13

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Support of Everett schools’ bond, levy shapes student success

As a proud parent of daughters who began their Everett Public Schools… Continue reading

New pharmacy at Everett clinic site will aid patients

I applaud our local pharmacist Sovit Bista for opening Robin Hood Pharmacy… Continue reading

Goldberg: ICE killing of Renee Good meant as message for us all

Civil rights, not just of immigrants, but of all Americans are being curtailed. Protest no longer is protected speech.

Comment: DOJ’s voter info demand a data breach waiting to happen

A centralized database of sensitive information is prone to abuse, theft and human error.

Kristof: In Venezuela, Trump trades rule of law for rule of oil

Its socialist government, which lost the last election, remains in power; as long as it bends to Trump.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, Jan. 12

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

FILE - The sun dial near the Legislative Building is shown under cloudy skies, March 10, 2022, at the state Capitol in Olympia, Wash. An effort to balance what is considered the nation's most regressive state tax code comes before the Washington Supreme Court on Thursday, Jan. 26, 2023, in a case that could overturn a prohibition on income taxes that dates to the 1930s. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File)
Editorial: No new taxes, but maybe ‘pay as we go’ on some needs

New taxes won’t resolve the state’s budget woes, but more limited reforms can still make a difference.

Comment: Supreme Court readies lifeline for House Republicans

A final gutting of the Voting Rights Act could swing districts to the GOP at all election levels

Comment: Europe must prepare for Trump’s plans for Greenland

The vast northern island may not be next on Trump’s list, but his threats and U.S. might provide an inside track.

Comment: Don’t punish Illinois, other states for Minnesota’s fraud

The withholding of funding of social programs looks suspiciously partisan and particularly unfair.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.