MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Marianna Belenkaya.) The events in the Middle East in late October and early November provoked a mixed reaction.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said the construction of a dividing wall between Israelis and Palestinians would continue, but confirmed his commitment to the peace process in the region. Israel approved a series of army operations in response to the terrorist attack in Hadera in late October.
This brings to mind the words of the late Israeli premier Yitzhak Rabin: "Fight terrorism as if there is no peace process, pursue peace as if there is no terrorism." Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov quoted him after talks with the Palestinian leaders in Ramallah on the day of the terrorist attack in Hadera. Lavrov called on Palestinians and Israelis to follow the noble example of Rabin.
Yitzhak Rabin was killed on November 4, 1995, on a Sabbath afternoon, following a political rally in Tel Aviv in support of the peace process. A 27 year-old student of Jewish law named Yigal Amir was apprehended on the scene and confessed to the crime.
Today, ten years after Rabin's death, we are commemorating him at the peak of another reassessment of events in the Middle East. For years the people in Israel and Palestine wondered if Rabin had been right or wrong to shake the hand of Yassir Arafat, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, on the White House Lawn in September 1993.
"Of all hands in the world, it was not the hand that I wanted or dreamed of touching," Rabin later said about that handshake. Yet he did it. He said on the White House Lawn: "We, the soldiers who have returned from battle stained with blood, we who have seen our relatives and friends killed before our eyes, we who have attended their funerals and cannot look into the eyes of their parents, we who have come from a land where parents bury their children, we who have fought against you, the Palestinians - we say to you today in a loud and clear voice: Enough of blood and tears. Enough. ...The time for peace has come."
Born into a family of Jewish emigrants from czarist Russia (his father was from Ukraine and his mother from Mogilev), Yitzhak Rabin was first in many things. He was the first Sabra (a native-born Israeli) to become the premier of Israel and its youngest leader (he was 52 at the time). He was also the first general to head the government and, most importantly, the first leader to sign agreements with the Palestinians. For that, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres (then foreign minister of Israel) and Yassir Arafat were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
It was said in Israel and Palestine in his lifetime and after his assassination that the agreements were misguided and dangerous, that they were full of traps that hindered the peace process. Some Israelis say Rabin's peace process did not bring security to Israel, that the number of terrorist attacks only increased while Palestinians now have the legal right to carry weapons.
However, security was what encouraged Yitzhak Rabin to talk with the Palestinians. The current premier of Israel, Ariel Sharon, is guided by the same aspiration.
The situation in Israel in 1992-1995 was similar to what is happening today. At that time, Rabin's talks with the Palestinians, Syrians and other Arabs split the country in two, with mass protest actions against Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories and clashes of opinion inside Knesset (parliament).
In summer 2005, Ariel Sharon ordered the evacuation of Jewish settlements from Gaza and a part of the West Bank. Like this summer, ten years ago bombs exploded in Israel in response to steps made towards peace. Israel ordered the army in and halted the talks. In this sense, Rabin was not at all softer than Sharon. But human mind remembers only what it wants to remember.
However, there is a major difference between Rabin and Sharon: Israel as it was in the early 1990s and as it is now. In the past 12 years, Israelis have become disillusioned in peace talks, and they and Palestinians are disappointed with each other. They are no longer euphoric and have no illusions. No wonder that Sharon, unlike Rabin, rejects the very possibility of "talks under fire." Sharon's tactic is the tactic of a man who sees the uselessness of continued fighting but does not believe in coexistence.
Rabin, however, did, and this is his main difference from Sharon. That belief launched Palestinians and Israelis on a quest for peace, and this is the most valuable part of his heritage. Because of his courage, there is no alternative to peace for any Israeli or Palestinian leader, including Sharon. The only question is which path they choose to reach this goal.
The path today is less clear than before. What is more valuable, agreements that cannot be implemented or security ensured by military force? As a result, there is neither real security nor effective agreements. There is only Rabin's last will: "Give peace a chance."
