Some searches are easier than others: as it ensues from this issue
of the Journal, those striving for regional cooperation in our area
do so in a political environment that places formidable
difficulties in the way of searchers. This is most vividly
illustrated in the interviews with Israeli Minister of Regional
Cooperation, Shimon Peres, and Palestinian Minister for Planning
and Cooperation, Nabil Sha'ath. Peres stresses that peace requires
"a Middle East integrated in the modern global economy [and]
regional cooperation in order to create a modern regional
infrastructure benefiting all the peoples of the Middle East."
Sha'ath responds that instead of substituting dreams for reality,
"you have to carry out the simple task of withdrawing from our
country… We cannot talk of regionalism if our people cannot
move freely… We should totally forget the dreams of any
regional improvement until the political process achieves its
results." Some Arabs are frightened of Israeli economic hegemony,
but both Sha'ath and other experts tend to discount these
fears.
Here and there, of course, one comes across noncontroversial and
functioning examples of regional cooperation between Israelis, on
the one hand, and Palestinians, Jordanians, etc., on the other,
some of which are described in this issue. It turns out, however,
that even on a joint project like industrial parks, there are
different evaluations. In the Israeli view, they offer the
Palestinians work that helps raise their standard of living,
provides them with experience toward the future, and meets Israel's
security concerns. The Palestinians claim that they were denied
equal and independent status in these projects and that they, in
any case, contribute nothing toward establishing a viable
Palestinian industrial infrastructure, which is what they need
most. Some Palestinians see the parks as mere exploitation; others
point out that, in any event, branches like textiles can't compete
with plants in Asia.
The issue of regional cooperation is naturally to be seen in the
context of the broadly shared refusal in the Arab states to
normalize their relations with Israel before the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict is solved. While there are circles on
both Egyptian and Jordanian political landscape that support
normalization, they are a small minority compared to the opposition
in practice to any thaw. Some writers in this issue analyze this
problem, which is clearly among the dominant factors hampering the
development of regional cooperation.
This question is naturally reflected in Palestinian political
discourse. Thus Ali al-Khalili, former chairman of the Writer's
Union in the West Bank and Gaza, says that "Israel does not
understand, or does not want to understand, that an Arab is neither
a primitive nor a fool, and good neighborliness cannot coexist with
the occupation and the Jewish settlements beyond the 1967 line, the
theft of our water, and the denial of the refugees' right of
return."
However, one of the basic points made in this issue of the Journal
is that, because of the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,
the problem of Palestinian relations with Israel cannot be compared
to that of Egyptians or Jordanians. There can be very little
normalization and, hence, regional cooperation. On the other hand,
normalization should not be confused with dialogue.
Palestinian-Israeli dialogue is seen as an important factor in
preparing for a more peaceful future, whatever the political
circumstances.
A broad dialogue is also conducted on the problems of regional and
Palestinian-Israeli cooperation. Whether the writers be
Palestinians, Israelis or international experts, political figures
or economists, soldiers or journalists, educationalists or health
workers, they are contributing to that sort of dialogue which is a
prerequisite to progress toward any better understanding of the
issues that continue to divide the two peoples.