Israel, Palestine Differ on Navigating Road Map to Peace in Middle East by Larry Luxner Is the Intifada over? Is peace about to break out between Israel and the Arab world? Daniel Ayalon, Israelís ambassador to the United States, certainly thinks itís possibleóas long as Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas contains radical terrorist groups, Jewish settlers are allowed to stay in the West Bank, Jerusalem remains under Israeli control, and Yasser Arafat is kept out of the limelight. ìI donít think itís wishful thinking to say that the new Palestinian leadership understands that terror has not brought them anything. On the contrary, it has set them back,î Ayalon told The Washington Diplomat in a recent interview. As both sides struggle to bring about an end to the Palestinian uprising that has cost more than 2,400 Arab and 800 Jewish lives, Abbas and his counterpart, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, have signed onto the Middle East ìroad mapî promoted by President Bush. Yet Sharon and Abbas have vastly different ideas about how to follow that road map to a lasting peace. In June, Sharon surpris ed Palestinians and angered many Israelis when he used the word ìoccupationî for the first time to describe Israelís military presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, territories it has controlled since 1967. Ayalon said Sharonís choice of words was no accident. ìOccupation is controlling other people,î he said. ìWe do not wish nor do we seek control over the Palestinians. Weíd like to live side by side with them, in dignity.î Before being appointed Israelís man in Washington a year ago, Ayalon, 47, was Sharonís foreign policy adviser. He has also counseled former Israeli prime ministers Ehud Barak and Benjamin Netanyahu on foreign policy issues. In addition, Ayalon has had years of experience in the world of diplomacy, having represented Israel along with other delegates at peace summits in Sharm el-Sheikh (1997), Wye Plantation (1998) and Camp David (2000). Before that, the diplomat was posted to the Israeli Embassy in Panama, where he was responsible for political, economic and cultural ties between the two nations. Yet it is here in Washington where Ayalonówho replaced David Ivry as Israelís ambassadoróthinks he can do the most good for his country. ìItís certainly a moment of hope for Israel, the Palestinians and for the whole region. I also see it as a great success of U.S. foreign policy and this administration in particular,î he said. ìBoth [National Security Adviser] Condoleezza Rice and [Secretary of State] Colin Powell are indispensable for their trust, intimate knowledge and sharp analysis.î In Ayalonís opinion, the biggest dagger hanging over the peace process is PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. The Israeli ambassador makes no secret of his hatred for the man who for more than 30 years has personified the Palestinian struggle for self-determination. ìYou cannot underestimate Arafatís potential for damage,î Ayalon said. ìArafat is an enemy of peace, not just an enemy of Israel and the United States. We cannot sweep this under the carpet. Once we act upon that, we have to be consistent. But we understand the sensitivities. Thatís why we have to work in different ways and dimensions to keep him at bay, to render him obsolete without causing any humiliation.î The day Ayalon was being interviewed in his office at the well-guarded Israeli Embassy on International Drive, a small, noisy group of protestors picketed the embassyís perimeter, carrying signs demanding the release of Mordechai Vanunu, an Israeli scientist imprisoned in 1986 for spilling secrets about the countryís nuclear weapons program to foreign journalists. The embassy is, in fact, a frequent site for anti-Israeli demonstrations of all kinds, which have become more frequent since the beginning of the Intifada in September 2000. But Ayalon said he expects the uprising to die down once Abbas shows ìdecisive leadershipî in front of his own people. ìThe Palestinians have been betrayed for so long by poor leaders,î he said. ìDemocracy is a new concept for them. Traditionally, they have never been presented with a choice.î Yet when it comes to the so-called ìright of returnî for Palestinian refugees who fled or were forced from their homes when Israel declared statehood in 1948, Ayalon said there is no choice. ìFor me, this is a code calling for the destruction of Israel,î the ambassador said. ìIf we create a new Palestinian state, then all Palestinian refugees would have the right to return to that Palestinian state, but not to Israel. I truly believe that, from a moral, historical and even legal point of view, they have no rights in our land.î Ayalon also defended the building of a sophisticated security fence that roughly parallels Israelís 1967 borders but at times cuts deeply into Palestinian territory. Dismissing strong U.S. objections over the planned 200-mile fence, Ayalon said the controversial projectówhich is costing Israeli taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollarsówill provide Israel an unprecedented measure of security. ìThe real danger is the ease with which any Palestinian terrorist can strap 20 or 50 pounds of bombs on his body and explode them in our midst,î he said. ìRight now, they have a 100 percent success rate. If they want to cross, they just cross. But no suicide bombers have entered from Gaza, where we have had a fence [since 1994]. All of them came from the West Bank.î Ayalon added, ìIf this new fence prevents even one suicide bombing, it will enable an atmosphere conducive to dialogue, and ultimately this will create trust between people.î Despite his tough talk, Ayalonówho holds a masterís of business administration degree from Ohioís University of Bowling Greenóappears far more at ease with the press than did Ivry, a war hero turned diplomat who was appointed by Barak and interviewed by the Diplomat two and a half years ago. Since then, much has happened, starting with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, which Ayalon said ìfurther bondedî Israel and the United States in the fight against terrorism. ìI see my job almost as an extension of my previous job, which was foreign policy adviser to Prime Minister Sharon. In that role, I kept constant and very close relations with the administration,î he said, adding that ìfurthering understanding between Israel and the Jewish community is one of my most privileged tasks, and I do it very happily.î Ayalon said he feels fortunate to serve as Israelís ambassador at a time when ìthere is such great understandingî between Israel and the United States. ìThe United States is Israelís best friend and ally, and that makes my life as an ambassador very easy. But itís not just a relationship between governments. Everywhere, I see a great affinity for Israel by most Americans, and not just the Jewish community,î Ayalon said. ìNo other country has had a more moral basis for its foreign policy than the United Statesóthe champion of freedom and democracy throughout the world. America was always courageous in facing up to tyrants and dictators. These values make the foundations for a good relationship with Israel.î Non-Jewish Americans, the ambassador said, generally support Israel because they see it as ìa country which stands on its own, the only democracy in a sea of backward, dictatorial regimes. They see Israel as a beacon of hope for the entire region. You should not underestimate the importance of shared values.î Nevertheless, several key issues divide the two countries, the most serious of which is the flourishing of Jewish settlements throughout the West Bank and Gaza. The U.S. government, and a number of Israelis, view those settlementsóhome to about 200,000 Jews amid a sea of 2.2 million Palestiniansóas an ìobstacle to peace.î Yet Ayalon draws a distinction between the larger, populated settlements and small, ìunauthorizedî hilltop outposts consisting of one or two trailers that are gradually being removed by the Israeli Army. ìAll the unauthorized outposts will come down,î he promised, ìand I donít think itíll spark civil war. We have been tested in the past. Whatever the government decides, the public will follow, no matter how hard it is.î Even so, the ambassador declined to speculate on how Sharon would go about removing much larger, populated settlementsóor if Israel would ever dismantle those settlements at all, given the enormous political and religious uproar such a move could trigger. ìThe Sharon government is committed not to expand settlements,î he said. ìWe are willing to give up part of our homeland, and weíre ta lking here about the cradle of Jewish civilization. But the issue of Jewish settlements cuts right to the core of the political conflict we have with the Palestinians, and I wouldnít want to prejudge any of the outcomes.î Another issue that cuts right to the core of the conflict is sovereignty over Jerusalem. The city, which is holy to Christians, Muslims and Jews alike, was declared Israel's capital in 1948, even though Israel controlled only the western half; East Jerusalem was under Jordanian control. Most of the international community has avoided recognizing Israel's claim of Jerusalem as its capital, and only El Salvador and Costa Rica have moved their embassies there. Following the Six-Day War of 1967, Israel united East and West Jerusalem under its control, and in 1980, the Israeli government annexed occupied East Jerusalem, which is predominantly Arab. Asked if the Sharon government would ever allow East Jerusalem to be the capital of an independent Palestine, Ayalon made clear the subject wasnít open to discussion. ìThroughout history, Jerusalem has been the capital of only one people, and that was the Jewish people,î he said sternly. ìI rest my case.î Larry Luxner is a contributing writer for The Washington Diplomat.