Why Begin Should Invite Arafat to Jerusalem
Now that it has completed the Israeli withdrawal from Sinai, the government of Israel should consider extending unconditional recognition to the Palestine Liberation Organization as a major representative of the Palestinian people. PLO leader Yassir Arafat should be invited to follow in the footsteps of Egypt's late President Anwar el-Sadat and visit Jerusalem. And the PLO should be summoned to take its seat at the Palestine autonomy negotiations.
Joseph Alpher is Executive Editor at Tel Aviv University's Center for Strategic Studies. From 1969 to 1980 he served as an official in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office.
Now that it has completed the Israeli withdrawal from Sinai, the government of Israel should consider extending unconditional recognition to the Palestine Liberation Organization as a major representative of the Palestinian people. PLO leader Yassir Arafat should be invited to follow in the footsteps of Egypt's late President Anwar el-Sadat and visit Jerusalem. And the PLO should be summoned to take its seat at the Palestine autonomy negotiations.
The act of invitation and recognition should involve no conditions or qualifications-but neither should it imply concessions on Israel's part. Indeed, the point of departure for this proposal is, from the Israeli outlook, more hawkish than dovish on the Palestine issue: it acknowledges that the PLO and its leadership are extremist terrorists bent on Israel's total destruction; it assumes that Israel must maintain at least a strong security presence throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip for the foreseeable future; and it recognizes that evacuation of Israeli settlements from these territories is fast becoming a political impossibility.
Why, then, should Israel unilaterally recognize the PLO? For a number of sound tactical reasons which, taken together, only enhance Israel's strategy of ensuring its own security within safe borders. Categorizing these reasons somewhat arbitrarily for the sake of simplicity, the first may be termed image-building-enhancing Israel's image in its own eyes, and in the eyes of the world. The second may be defined under the catch-all heading of Realpolitik. And the third may be understood as a broader political effort to improve Israel's tactical position vis-à-vis the Arab world and the West.
II
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
The Oslo accord has failed. Battered by a wave of fundamentalist terrorism, Israelis are ready to elect a hard-line Likud government, while many frustrated Palestinians are spurning the PLO in favor of the Islamic extremists of Hamas. Locked in a political embrace, PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin are dragging each other down. The process may stagger on, but it will never yield peace.
Israel is pushing the Obama administration to tackle Iran's nuclear program before the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Washington shouldn't listen.
Through nearly four decades, the circumstances of its creation and existence have forced the modern state of Israel into a deep-seated preoccupation with security, the precondition for its survival. As the nature of the threats to its continued existence changed at various junctures between 1947 and the present, so have the military and security doctrines guiding national policy. Israel now stands at another turning point, and the time has come for a new security doctrine, a strategy resting upon long-standing principles, but significantly modified to meet the circumstances of 1985 and beyond.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.