It is not yet clear when Tony Blair will start his work as an envoy to the Middle East or the resources that will be at his disposal. It is already obvious, however, that the struggle within the Palestinian Authority will largely decide whether wider progress in the region is possible. In the past few weeks the division between the Hamas-led Gaza and a West Bank broadly under the control of Fatah has been cemented. In theory, the two places are components of one emerging state. In practice, they are totally separated.
Those minded towards conspiracies will doubtless either blame Israel for what has come to pass or suggest that its Government would benefit from each statelet descending into chaos. In fact, it is in Israel’s interests that Mahmoud Abbas, President of the whole Palestinian Authority but de facto chieftain of the West Bank alone, succeeds in his attempt to improve the economic, social and political conditions of his people. In the immediate aftermath of the split within the Palestinian camp, Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister of Israel, acted swiftly by releasing about £50 million in tax revenues to the West Bank that had previously been frozen. Yesterday he took a bolder step still, declaring that 250 Palestinian prisoners held by Israel and linked to Fatah would be freed early.
This is not a move that will be universally popular within Israel’s borders. While some of those released will have committed comparatively minor crimes, such a list would only be credible (and of value to Mr Abbas) if it contained names whom many Israelis would consider little better than terrorists. Mr Olmert is bound to be denounced by the Likud opposition. He remains highly vulnerable at home, clinging to his position, after a damning report into the conflict in Lebanon last year all but charged him with exaggerating what Israel could expect to achieve on that battlefield. This is a brave move by a politician who could easily be displaced.
Yet the risk is worth it. If the West Bank comes to be regarded as a place of progress, a large part of the population in Gaza will wonder whether it is wise to continue with the Hamas experiment. Fatah has many, many faults, most of which are the legacy of corruption personified by the late and unlamented Yassir Arafat, but it is a secular force and it contains within it individuals who, in private at least, are realistic about the nature of any ultimate peace settlement with Israel.
The sensible path not only for Mr Olmert but also for all benign outside actors is to encourage the new regime in the West Bank while insisting that any aid awarded is strictly audited. If this occurs, Mr Abbas may finally be able to deliver not only for Palestinians but also Israelis. Mr Olmert must, therefore, while being wary of security problems, seek to integrate the economy of the West Bank into Israel’s as far as is possible.
Advertisement
Britain should support him in that enterprise. The new role of the former Prime Minister will also increase London’s profile in this territory. Mr Blair will, though, be an independent figure and not an extension of the Foreign Office. Gordon Brown should neither be embarrassed by the presence of his old friend and rival nor afraid to pursue his distinctive outlook of how to bring Israel and Palestine together, an approach that has long relied on economic renewal as a catalyst for political flexibility. The round of prisoner exchanges that is about to begin constitutes a serious chance for compromise. All concerned should seize it.