Arab countries have agreed – unilaterally or through summits – that peace with Israel is a strategic choice. In this sense, they stand ready to establish normal ties with the Hebrew state, on the basis of restoring the Arab rights which were snatched by power and wars. The Arab States have collectively launched many peace initiatives, the last of which was the peace initiative proposed by Saudi Arabia in Beirut's 2002 Summit. This initiative stipulates that normalization with Israel is contingent upon the establishment of an independent Palestinian State (the two-state solution) and the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Arab territories; the Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese ones (the land for peace principle). In the past, these Arab initiatives were mere positions, met by Israel's continued policy to impose the fait accompli by armed force. This is because the Israeli understanding of peace rests on the Arabs succumbing to Israeli conditions, and because Israel gains huge international support at the expense of the Arab rights. Today, the equation has changed. Peace is not only an Arab strategic choice, but also a need and a requirement for the stability of the region and the interests of the international powers. The countries that had traditionally supported Israel against the Arabs are fully convinced that this stability will never be realized without a peace that rests on an independent Palestinian and an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Arab lands. This is being expressed in the concerned western states, namely in the United States and Europe, and all international bodies, particularly the Security Council. It was also translated through the recent presidential statement issued by the ministerial council's session, which gave it moral and political power that exceeds its nature as a mere statement. In the face of this new international climate which is getting closer to the Arab peace initiative, the new Israeli right-wing government still clings to its previous positions that hindered just, permanent and comprehensive peace in the past. Its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to reshuffle the international equation, whether by disseminating ideas that do not conform to the minimum level required, or through his changing positions. At times, he speaks of improving the economic situation of the Palestinians before engaging in political talks, and at others he speaks of fighting the so-called Palestinian terrorism. At the same time, he continues to create new and serious facts on the ground, ones that foil the political talks in advance. On the other hand, Netanyahu depicts the Iranian nuclear file as the only imminent threat to the region, saying that priority should be given to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapon. Here, Netanyahu relies on the Arab positions that are against the spread of nuclear weapons in the region, in order to promote the Arab-Israeli consensus over the priority of the Iranian threat, and to tell the world which is interested in real peace, that there is an Israeli-Arab consensus over the nature of this period. The most dangerous aspect of Netanyahu's policy lies in this Israeli endeavor. Furthermore, in his attempt to be a partner to the Arabs and the western world against Iran, Netanyahu actually seeks to strike the international consensus over the priority of settling the conflict in the Middle East and the Israeli requirements. While the new US Administration, along with the European Union and the Security Council, send clear-cut messages to Israel to the effect that peace can only be achieved through the two-state solution and Israel's withdrawal from the Arab lands, Netanyahu is attempting to gain credibility through his Arab contacts, namely with Cairo and Amman. The Arabs should not fall in this Israeli trap, on the eve of Netanyahu's decisive visit to Washington. President Hosni Mubarak has intentionally spoken of the two-state solution, a talk which Netanyahu will also hear in Amman. But the fears of a sudden deterioration – for which Israel bears responsibility in any case – should harden the Arab position and strengthen the Arab adherence to the conditions of the Arab peace initiative as one package for normalization. At the same time, the Arabs should expose the Israeli anti-peace position, and avoid reshuffling the priorities, regardless of how severe some Arab positions are vis-à-vis the Iranian ambitions in the region. After all, such international consensus over the legitimacy of the Arab rights may not be repeated in the event of a slackened approach to Netanyahu's policy or an armed confrontation with Iran.
