TIME: Almanac 1995

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ TIME: Almanac 1995 / TIME Almanac 1995.iso / time / 031891 / 0318004.000 < prev next >

Wrap

Text File | 1993-04-15 | 6KB | 124 lines

<text id=91TT0548> <link 91TT0666> <link 91TT0606> <title> Mar. 18, 1991: The Saudis Seize The Day </title> <history> TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1991 Mar. 18, 1991 A Moment To Savor </history> <article> <source>Time Magazine</source> <hdr> WORLD, Page 38 DIPLOMACY The Saudis Seize the Day </hdr><body> Off the mark early, Riyadh suggests uniting the West Bank and Gaza into a Greater Jordan--but without King Hussein By George J. Church--With reporting by Dean Fischer/Riyadh and William Mader/London Time is short. The gulf war forged new alliances, shattered old ideas and forced a reconsideration of dug-in positions, giving peace at least a slim chance in the Middle East. But the new climate may not last much longer than a desert rainstorm; old habits, ways of thinking and alignments could quickly reassert themselves. So, to use a much overworked but appropriate metaphor, all parties interested in an Arab-Israeli peace process must scramble through the window of opportunity before it bangs shut. That is a large part of the message Secretary of State James Baker is carrying on a swing through the Middle East that began last week. It is also what he heard on his first stop Friday in Riyadh; his Saudi Arabian hosts are equally convinced of the need to move fast. In fact, the Saudis have developed some ideas that they think should be part of any Middle East settlement--not quite detailed enough to be called a plan but still more specific than anything that has yet come out of Washington. Though Riyadh's suggestions were not raised with Baker, at least initially, British sources report that Saudi officials did outline their approach to Prime Minister John Major during his visit last week to the kingdom. The central idea, however, looks to be one that Israel could be brought to consider only under almost unimaginable U.S. pressure, and perhaps not even then. Riyadh would combine the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jordan into a new Palestinian state that would be economically linked to Israel in a common market. It is not entirely a new thought. Ronald Reagan in 1982 proposed Palestinian "self-government" in the West Bank and Gaza in a federation with Jordan. The Saudis, however, seem to look toward a much tighter union. Probably the most striking new wrinkle is that the Saudis contemplate King Hussein's abdication. Before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, Hussein's kingdom included the West Bank. But the Saudis doubt that any Arab Hashemite King could now rule an amalgam of Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinians have about a 60% majority over Bedouin-descended Arabs even in present-day Jordan; they would be far more dominant still in an expanded state. In Riyadh's eyes, Hussein would either be overthrown or have to abdicate--and good riddance. Riyadh has been terminally infuriated by Hussein's siding with Iraq in the just-ended war. Saudis devoutly believe that the Jordanian King conspired with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who is no relation, to carve up Saudi Arabia. King Hussein supposedly would have reigned over the holy cities of Mecca and Medina as a sort of Iraqi viceroy (his ancestors ruled that part of Arabia until driven out by Ab dul Aziz, founder of the House of Saud, before World War I). Outside Arabia, most analysts doubt Saddam would ever have shared power that way. Some Saudis think King Hussein is on the way out anyway. If he is toppled by a coup, they fear, Jordan might be torn by a Lebanon-style civil war, or ruled by radical Palestinians or Islamic fundamentalists. British diplomats believe that scenario would be more likely if the Saudi ideas are adopted than if they are not. By backing Iraq, they believe, Hussein has won enough popularity with Jordan's Palestinian citizens to hold on in Amman, but he might indeed fall in an expanded, overwhelmingly Palestinian Jordan. London and Riyadh do agree that Syria is willing to make some sort of settlement with Israel about the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights if parallel progress can be made toward solving the Palestinian problem. Which at the moment seems a monstrous if. In Israel only the left wing would consider anything resembling the Saudi approach, and it has been discredited by Palestinian cheers for the Scud missiles rained on Israel by Iraq during the war. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir has no intention of yielding an inch of the occupied territories; he will not even promote his own 1989 plan to hold elections in the territories and then negotiate limited autonomy with the people's choices. If Shamir should falter, he may be brought down by the rightists in the governing Likud coalition who want to annex the territories outright and even transfer most of the 1.7 million Palestinians living there to present-day Jordan. Washington nonetheless is disposed to welcome the Saudi ideas as a sign of fresh thought. Says a senior White House official: "To the degree that different players are thinking of new approaches or reviving old approaches, it creates an atmosphere in which you can begin to pick and choose and put together something that may be able to advance the process." As always, the obstacles to peace in the Middle East appear insurmountable. But there is a new sense of urgency in tackling those obstacles, and that just might be enough to get something started. </body></article> </text>