By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Mar 5 1996 (IPS)

What was only recently touted as the Bill Clinton administration’s greatest foreign policy success is now tottering, analysts here say of the Mideast peace process.

Only a month ago, Mideast expert Geoffrey Kemp had proclaimed that “We’re now at a point of no return.”

But Kemp, who was on the National Security Council of former President Ronald Reagan, had added one caveat: “So long as there are …no massive terrorist incidents in the next four months, it will be extremely difficult for Israel to reoccupy Gaza and the West Bank.”

In the last 10 days, that caveat has asserted itself with a vengeance. Bombers from the militant Islamic movement, Hamas, have claimed more than 60 lives in four blasts. The latest came Monday, when a lone suicide-bomber blew himself up just outside Tel Aviv’s largest shopping centre.

The blast followed a declaration of “total war” against Hamas by the normally dovish Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres. Another suicide bomber killed himself and at least 18 others aboard a Jerusalem bus Sunday.

U.S. officials have reacted not only with the ritual denunciations, but also with anger.

“I want to express my deep anger at the news of this latest bombing in Israel,” Clinton declared at the beginning of a major campaign speech in Detroit. He referred to the forces behind the bombings as “people …really literally willing to die just keep the division and the hatred and violence going.”

Asked if the Israelis should exercise restraint in responding to the last two bombings, Clinton demurred, insisting “we have to stand with the proposition that those who are responsible for this should be held accountable.”

And while praising Palestinian Authority president Yassir Arafat’s commitment to peace, Clinton warned that “Mr. Arafat will have to do more” to crack down on Hamas, a point on which there was considerable agreement here.

“Arafat must now go in and arrest the leaders who were responsible,” said Gail Pressberg of Americans for Peace Now. She said the Israeli government had given Arafat a list of their names Sunday. “He can’t negotiate with these groups now.”

Up to last weekend, Pressberg and others had voiced sympathy for Arafat’s efforts to divide Hamas by coopting the group’s political leadership into a loyal opposition while isolating its military hierarchy.

This strategy was endorsed in a New York Times column Friday. Ori Nir, Palestinian correspondent for the Israeli daily Haaretz, warned Peres against measures, including sealing off Palestinian territories and delaying withdrawal from Hebron. He said this would “corner Arafat” and deny him flexibility in dealing with Hamas.

“I might have agreed with him on Friday, but not now,” Kemp said Monday. “This is a war and has to be fought like one.”

He described Arafat as “the real loser” in these bombing attacks, noting that progress in implementing the peace agreement may now come to a screeching halt “unless Arafat’s actions in cracking down on Hamas are so demonstrably effective that even the Israelis give him credit.”

Pressberg agreed with Kemp that if Arafat gets results, confidence in Peres can be restored, but that, for now, the Israeli leader was in deep trouble with an electorate that has been stunned by the carnage.

A word of caution, however, was voiced by James Zogby, head of the Arab-American Institute here. Noting that three of the alleged bombers travelled from Israeli-occupied Hebron along an Israeli- controlled road, Zogby said “it’s not fair to complain that the Palestinian Authority is not doing enough.”

“What the bombers want is to create panic and fear and bring about repression and end the peace process. They couldn’t win the Palestinian election, but they’re hoping to influence the Israeli election,” he said.

Simona Sharoni, an Israeli who teaches conflict resolution studies at American University here, agrees with Zogby that it would be a mistake to place too much pressure on Arafat.

“Responding to violence with more violence will not stop the violence,” she said. “We have to try alternatives.”

According to Kemp, however, Peres will have to impose greater physical separation between Israel and the Palestinians in the short term.

“Once you talk about separation, you’re essentially setting up the conditions for either a Palestinian state or a Palestinian ghetto,” he said. “The political debate in Israel has to be about which is more likely to serve Israel’s security interests.”

Excerpt: