A Proposal for Israeli-Syrian Peace

Uri Misgav in Yedioth Ahronoth:

Frederick Hoff [sic], President Barack Obama's man for negotiations between Israel and Syria, began an intensive three-day visit to Israel yesterday.

It remains unknown what messages Hoff [sic], a diplomat who specializes in resolving international conflicts, will take with him to Damascus. What is known is the outline that Hoff [sic] presented to the Israeli leadership.

The position paper that he published in March that was titled, Mapping out Peace between Syria and Israel, is not merely another academic document. Rather, there are two features that render it urgently pertinent: its timing and quality.

The timing: Hoff [sic] published his position paper while he was already an official candidate to coordinate the field of Syrian affairs for George Mitchell's team. From the moment that Hoff [sic] began his new job, that position paper has become the almost-official position of the Obama administration.

The second feature is the quality of the position paper in terms of its depth and scope. The Hoff [sic] proposal is spread over 20 pages and includes, among other things, a very accurate review of the issues that underlie the differences of opinion between Israel and Syria. Hoff [sic] shows a rare sensitivity to the two sides' psychological situations, including a particularly impressive in-depth analysis of the water issue and the Sea of Galilee. That element is particularly important, because at the focal point of the document is the idea of creating a "nature reserve" (or a park) that is geared first and foremost to overcome the psychological problems that have prevented the two sides from reaching an agreement to date.

It is important to understand and to bear in mind that in all the talks that have been held between Israel and Syria ever since the "deposit" that Rabin left with secretary of state Warren Christopher (including during the first Netanyahu government), the parties reached nearly complete agreement on a series of pressing issues: withdrawal and the evacuation of the settlements, security arrangements and early warning stations, demilitarizing the Golan Heights and the use of the water sources. The obstacle that stood in the way of a signed agreement was the inability of the two sides to agree on the final border that would demarcate Syrian sovereignty on the Golan Heights. The Americans' intention to renew the talks is based on their faith in their ability to resolve that old problem.

What precisely does the "nature reserve" proposal involve?

As noted above, it is geared to provide what is mainly a psychological solution that will allow the two parties to reach an agreement and to feel that their psychological needs have been met. A variety of versions of this agreement have been circulating for the past 13 years already. Hoff [sic] mentioned it in a document ten years ago and itemized it in a detailed position paper he wrote in 2001.

The ground-breaking idea is to separate sovereignty from control. In other words, not to have the line of sovereignty necessarily convey the line up until which use can be made of the area. Simply put, to reach an agreement about a certain area in the southern Golan Heights and the eastern shores of the Sea of Galilee that will formally be placed under

Syrian sovereignty, but in practice will be accessible to the two parties-without them having to present passports and pass through border
control.

Hoff [sic] and others suggest that a variety of civilian uses can be made of those nature reserves: hiking, touring, and perhaps even academic and agricultural activity.

One of the important things about the current Hoff [sic] document is what is absent from it. The document does not specify precisely the boundaries of the nature reserve. Officials who were in touch with Hoff [sic] in previous years said that he had taken into account comments that were presented to him after the publication of his previous document in 2001, at which point he appended an explicit and precise map of the desired nature reserve. This time he has refrained from repeating that course of action. Refraining from appending a map would seem to indicate that the Americans have concluded that it would be best to leave that issue completely open to negotiation.