Mideast Peace Has a Price for the U.S.

Frank J. Gaffney Jr. directs the Center for Security Policy in Washington. He held senior Defense Department positions under Ronald Reagan

TOMORROW, THE WHITE House will be the site of the second Israeli-PLO signing ceremony in two years. The choice of venue is fitting – although not for the reasons President Bill Clinton has in mind, namely lending U.S. prestige to the event and reflecting politically useful credit on his administration. Rather, the Washington setting is appropriate because the United States, although not a party to the so-called "Oslo II" accords, will nonetheless bear some of the most serious repercussions of their predictable failure.

These repercussions will likely arise in three areas. The first and most strategically portentous will be the implications for the United States of Israel surrendering land essential to the Jewish state’s defense. If, as a result, Israel’s domestic security situation becomes more shaky, Israel will be far less able to serve as a bulwark for the West against radical Islam and other threats to American interests in the region.

Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin seeks to allay such concerns in the wake of the accords by promising that Israel will maintain a presence in the strategic Jordan River valley and provide protection for settlements built on key pieces of real estate in the West Bank. Unfortunately, such promises are unlikely to be kept. The Rabin government already has indicated its desire to liquidate some settlements. And, despite the new "bypass" roads and Israeli patrols instituted to promote the settlers’ safety, even the most stalwart of them may feel compelled to abandon the vital passes, crossroads, watersheds and high ground on which their homes have typically been situated.

Such a trend will only be exacerbated when PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat declares the newly relinquished territory a sovereign Palestinian state. The fences Rabin proposes to build between Israel and its new neighbor probably will not prevent terrorists from attacking the Jewish state. Certainly, these barriers will not afford the geographical protection or the assured access to vital water resources that Israel has enjoyed since it took control of the West Bank in 1967.

It is, of course, up to the democratically elected government of Israel to decide whether to take such risks. No one should be under any illusion, however: If the Rabin government proves to have recklessly "bet the farm," U.S. interests currently served by a strong, self-reliant and reliable Israeli ally in the Mideast will also be adversely affected.

The second area of concern about the accords involves the commitment of U.S. taxpayer dollars to induce the PLO to reach an agreement with Israel. So far, more than $ 500 million has been pledged, and well more than $ 100 million has already gone out the door.

Such American largesse is simply outrageous, given the mounting and persuasive evidence that international aid flowing to Arafat’s organizations is finding its way into his personal bank accounts – or those of his cronies. Some of it is old-fashioned corruption; some of it is to advance the PLO’s political agenda. As recently as last Wednesday, Arafat affirmed to the Al Ahram News Agency the malevolent nature of that agenda.

According to the Jerusalem Post, Arafat said his agreements with the Israelis followed "the blueprint of the 1974 PLO "plan of phases." That plan called for destruction of Israel as a second phase, to follow the initial establishment of Palestinian sovereignty over territories obtained from Israel through negotiation.

The third source of repercussions arises from the United States’ bowing to the Israeli desire for peace with the PLO and in the process subordinating its policy on those, like Arafat, who encourage terrorism. In just the past few weeks, two Americans were killed and a pregnant American woman lost her child in terrorist attacks in Israel. Yet Arafat has continued to tell his people in Arabic that such murderous attacks are the work of "heroes and martyrs" engaged in a "jihad [holy war] of battles and of death."

These newest casualties join a long list of U.S. victims of PLO terrorism for whom there must be accountability and punishment of the perpetrators, not legitimation and diplomatic, financial or other rewards.

In short, the costs of the champagne and caviar sure to be consumed at tomorrow’s White House signing ceremony are only the beginning of the high price Americans will be asked to bear for the latest Rabin-Arafat accord. Quite apart from concerns about what an unsustainable peace agreement will mean for Israel, it is entirely reasonable to ask: How many more of these ominous accords can the United States and its vital interests afford?