WYE ACCORD: 'MODEST STEP' ON 'DIFFICULT ROAD TO PEACE'

The accord signed between Palestinians and Israelis last Friday following more than a week of arduous negotiations at the Wye Conference Center in Maryland unleashed a torrent of editorial comment from the Middle East, Europe, Asia and Latin America. While nearly all commentators welcomed the agreement as having effected a "thaw" in the Mideast peace process after a nearly 20-month deadlock, the vast majority foresaw a dicey, if not "difficult" period ahead. Many observed that the "greatest problems," such as the status of Jerusalem, had not yet been addressed, nooting that these would have t be resolved in final status talks between Palestinians and Israelis. A number of editorials voiced strong praise for President Clinton's "energetic mediation" at Wye and expressed the conviction that without Mr. Clinton's "yeoman's service," there would have been no accord. Along those lines, many writers emphasized the need for "active U.S. engagement in the region" to ensure the accord's successful implementation. Many observers judged that the role of the CIA would be crucial in helping to safeguard security for Israel and the Palestinian Authority under the Wye accord. Nevertheless, its projected involvement met with a mixed reaction. A West Bank daily asserted that "the CIA...should make sure that the Israeli government apprehends murderers who kill [Palestinian] citizens in cold blood, and convict those terrorists with real sentences," while Tel Aviv's mass-appeal, pluralist Yediot contended that Israel would "need CIA involvement" to guarantee that Mr. Arafat carries out his security commitments. The question of the release of the convicted spy, Jonathan Pollard, was discussed in the Israeli and Lebanese press. Following are highlights in the commentary:

--Editorialists in Israel, Europe, Asia and Latin America lauded the president's role in bringing the Wye talks to a successful conclusion. In Israel, the independent Jerusalem Post spoke highly of Mr. Clinton's "statesmanship." Echoing that view, Rome's influential, left-leaning La Repubblica joined others in saying: "For nine months we saw 'the worst of Clinton,' and for nine days we have seen 'the best of Clinton.'"

MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

 ISRAEL:

"Hope For A New Era"
Editor Yaacov Erez said on the front-page of mass-appeal, pluralist Maariv (10/26): "Netanyahu proved at Wye that he is capable of jettisoning his rigid principles and that he is sufficiently sober and pragmatic to abandon the hawkish, Greater Israel, philosophy.... The Wye agreement was unavoidable if we did not want a split with the United States and the Western world, a complete breakdown of relations with the Arab world, and perhaps a war with the Palestinians."

"Clinton Deserves Praise For Job Well Done"
Washington correspondent Hillel Kuttler stated in the independent Jerusalem Post (10/26):
"[President Clinton's] yeoman service at Wye was...the act of a statesman.... For once, official Washington ought to take what occurred at face value and forfeit the temptation to view everything through a political prism."

"U.S. Guarantees, Intervention And Involvement"
Nationalist Hatzofe's lead editorial stressed (10/26):
"In his White House signing ceremony speech, President Clinton tried to treat the parties in an unbiased fashion...but the press reported from Wye that the Americans had far better chemistry with the Palestinians--both in terms of personal contacts and the magnitude of arm twisting.... Since the Madrid Conference, the United States has been acting as a broker between Israel and the Arabs--with varying amounts of fairness.... We may yet see the return of the American policy of the early 1970's, characterized by coercion and assistance manipulation."

"Freeing Pollard: Stupidity Or Malice?"
Analyst Amir Oren concluded in independent Haaretz (10/26):
"In trying to obtain Clinton's signature on an immediate and public pardon for Jonathan Pollard, Prime Minister Netanyahu may have been driven by either stupidity or malice.... Stupidity, because it takes an extra amount of idiocy to bring back to the minds of the Americans the issue of dual Jewish loyalty.... Or it may be malice. Netanyahu wanted to humiliate the U.S. president just days before the Congressional elections. Netanyahu wants a weak Clinton who could not apply too much pressure. He also wants a larger Republican majority in the House."

"A Good But Hard To Implement Agreement"
Senior analyst Ron Ben-Yishai commented in mass-appeal, pluralist Yediot (10/25):
"American involvement in all stages of security implementation is, from an Israeli standpoint, the main innovation and advantage of the agreement.... When it comes to security, nothing else really matters.... Israel will need CIA involvement particularly after the withdrawal is completed, when Arafat feels he has no clear interest in carrying out the security commitments.

"Why Keep Pollard?"
Ultra-Orthodox Yated Neeman contended (10/25):
"It is unclear whether the Americans do not want to free Pollard because he still knows sensitive secrets, because of hurt feelings or due to plain anti-Semitism. How else can one explain the fact that spies who worked for the USSR received lighter sentences and that Pollard, who spied for a friendly nation, was punished with exceptional severity. And we did not forget the fact that the United States continues to spy on and in Israel to this very day."

"The High Commissioner"
Ultra-orthodox Hamodia's editorial stated (10/26):
"The United States has bought the right to decide Israel's policies with a great deal of assistance money. The negotiations the government of Israel has been conducting at Wye were not with the Palestinians but with the Americans.... Netanyahu's agreement, just as Rabin's agreements, was dictated by the Americans, and the only question is which government was more expert in playing its hand in Washington."

WEST BANK:

"Trouble Already"
Independent, moderate Al-Quds judged (10/26):
"The settlers, by rioting and closing dozens of roads, attacking Palestinian citizens and their properties, and clashing with police, are acting in a way that violates the Wye Plantation agreement because by these actions, they incite and instigate against the Palestinian side. The Israeli side, which insisted at the Wye Plantation talks on the halting of [Palestinian] incitement against Israel, should start taking serious steps to end incitement from the Israeli side. Israelis should behave in the way that they expect Palestinians to behave if confidence is to be regained between the two sides and for the peace process to move ahead."

"Lists"
Fuad Abu Hijleh opined in semi-official Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (10/26):
"As Israel has lists of 'wanted' Palestinians and demands from the Palestinian Authority to arrest them for the sake of peace, we also have lists of Jewish terrorists who murdered Palestinian civilians and were rewarded by the Israeli government by letting them pay a symbolic bail for their freedom. We accept American involvement in our security arrangements, but we also insist that there be similar involvement with the Israelis and that the American administration rid itself of the double standard policy. Also, the CIA officers who will observe our activities, should make sure that the Israeli government apprehends murderers who kill [Palestinian] citizens in cold blood, and convict those terrorists with real sentences."

"Both Sides Face Difficulties"
Independent, moderate Al-Quds told readers (10/25):
"The agreement has put both sides in difficult positions.... However, the whole process is in Israel's hands, and it must implement its part and demonstrate a genuine interest in peace. Signing the agreement is a positive indicator of the possibility of reviving the peace process, but Israel's implementation of the agreement will be the real test."
 
 

JORDAN:

"Palestinian National Duty"
Daily columnist Nicola Naser penned this op-ed piece for independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab Al-Yawm (10/26):
"The Wye River agreement is actually a renegotiating effort over a past agreement. It dictated new amendments that entail new obligations for the Palestinian side in the field of security. These security obligations on the Palestinian side might achieve a long-standing objective of the Israeli occupation forces, namely intra-Palestinian fighting or a civil war. Avoiding the possibility of such a Palestinian conflict is a national duty which should be shouldered by the Palestinian National Authority and supported by the Palestinian opposition forces like Hamas."

"Important Agreement"
Rakan Majali asked in center-left, influential Al-Dustur (10/26):
Is the Palestinian National Authority capable of living up to its pledges in the Wye River agreement?

"Personally, I think it can. This means that Israel has achieved what it set out to do, namely security for its people. With this, Israel would have taken the last bargaining card from the Palestinians and this interim agreement would be the final agreement, particularly since Israel is not committed to discussing any specific topic in the final status negotiations. That is why the Wye Plantation agreement is very important; it could very well b game Yet"

An editorial in the centrist, influential Jordan Times argued (10/25):

"The bargaining is not over yet. From what Clinton had to say on Friday, it seems the Americans and the Israelis are resigned to the inevitability of the emergence of a Palestinian state.... So far, Arafat has been playing the game right. If he persists and perseveres, he will win."

EGYPT:

"Any Step Toward Peace Is A Gain"
Said Sonbol, columnist for pro-government Al Akhbar, declared (10/26):
"Any step toward achieving peace in the Middle East is a gain to its nations.... We hope that [the Wye agreement]...becomes a reality.... Any Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories is a gain to Palestinians, and a refutation of a...'Greater Israel.'... Will Netanyahu respect his signature?"

"Gains For Palestinians"
Abdel Azim Hammad pointed out in pro-government Al-Ahram (10/26):
"There are major political gains for the Palestinians in the Wye agreement. For the first time in history, a Likud government is being forced to withdraw from part of the West Bank.... The land under full Palestinian Authority rule has expanded. These gains can only mean that the right-wing party in Israel was forced to contradict its ideology."

"A Cautious Welcome"
Pro-government Al Ahram remarked (10/25):
"Observers can only welcome the agreement cautiously. It is a step on the right track if the Likud government's intentions are good.... The agreement will not fulfill its purpose as an interim agreement for the final status talks, unless it is a prelude to resuming the Syrian and Lebanese tracks."

"U.S. Role Crucial"
Mahmoud Abdel Moneim Mourad insisted in pro-government Al Akhbar (10/25):
"The most important stipulation in the agreement is that the United States will supervise its implementation so that it would not turn into mere ink on paper. Clearly the Israeli reaction to the agreement will be violent and will have serious consequences."
 
 

SYRIA:

"An Agreement Of Concessions"
Mohamed Ali Buza commented in government-owned Al-Thawra (10/25):
"The Wye Plantation agreement is considered by Zionist circles as an unprecedented victory for Israel, the gains of which have exceeded the Oslo agreement; Arafat has offered huge Palestinian concessions and accepted the usurpation of Palestinian rights."

"An Accord That Violates People's Rights"
Fouad Mardoud commented in the government-owned Syria Times (10/25):
"The most alarming aspect of the new Palestinian-Israeli accords is the role given to the ill-reputed Central Intelligence Agency, in the process of implementing the agreement.... Perhaps it is the first time ever that a foreign intelligence agency has taken on the role of supervising the work of another country with its consent."

"A Big Trick"
Mohamed Khair al-Wadi commented in government-owned Tishreen (10/26):
"The claim that the Wye Plantation agreement will revive the peace process lacks credibility.... It has become a habit for Netanyahu to escape fulfilling old and new agreements. It is therefore unlikely that he will fulfill this agreement."

 BAHRAIN:

"Accord's Fate Depends On Extent Of Its Implementation"
Omran Salman commented in leading, semi-independent Al-Ayam (10/26):
"Any agreement on paper is worthless if it is not implemented in reality.... There are many positive aspects of the recent Palestinian-Israeli accord if we disregard the concessions the Palestinian Authority made.... But the destiny of this agreement is subject to the extent to which it is implemented."

"Real Battle Lies Ahead"
Leading, semi-official Al-Ayam featured this comment by Mohamed Fadhel (10/25):
"We should focus on May, 1999. The real battle will happen at that date, which has been set for the withdrawal of the Israeli army from West Bank."

 LEBANON:

"An Agreement That Reflects Balance Of Power"
Joseph Samaha wrote in Arab Nationalist As-Safir (10/24):
"The Palestinian/Israeli agreement is not the result of negotiations at Wye Plantation. It is actually the crowning of a downhill Palestinian march that started years ago. "This time, however, Washington, not Israel, is responsible for the Arab's downfall.... The agreement has no relation to what is needed or what is right."

"Natural And Security Protectorates"
Sihar Basiri wrote in mainstream An-Nahar (10/24):
"We can say that the Wye agreement is the fruit of Israeli blackmail against the United States, which was crowned by the Pollard issue. This agreement will probably need other agreements to be implemented.... As for the Palestinian people, it is true that they will retain their Palestinian identity, but their status will be similar to that of the red Indians in the United States. With time, they will transform to natural protectorates."

 MOROCCO:

"Conditions Of Security"
Abdelhafid Rouissi penned this front-page comment for semi-official, French-language Le Matin (10/26):
"The Palestinian-Israeli agreement signed Friday has generated enough substantial ideas that it may strengthen hopes. The enemies of the past are now engaged in a dialogue on the future."

"The Mousetrap"
Independent, French-language L'Economiste had this front-page editorial (10/26):
"The Palestinian Authority has been gradually reduced to accepting joint management of the miserly amount of territory allotted to them, under Israeli security supervision and under the control of the CIA. This is irony of history, and the Palestinian Authority will surely carry out the dirty job."

"Small Step On The Road To Peace"
This front-page commentary by Tawfiq Jididi ran in government coalition, French-Language Al Bayane (10/25):
"The concessions made to Israelis on security and the the timing of implementation of agreements will make the Palestinian Authority suffer."

 QATAR:

"Basic Rights Still Important"
According to an editorial in semi-independent Al-Sharq (10/26):
"In spite of the two positive outcomes of the Wye Plantation summit, namely returning some land to the Palestinians and pushing the peace process forward, we hope that these two accomplishments do not overshadow the basic rights of the Palestinian people at the forefront of which are the return of refugees and diaspora, Jerusalem, and statehood."

 SAUDI ARABIA:

"Let's Wait And See"
Riyadh-based, moderate Al-Jazira's editorial recommended (10/26):
"We do not want to see the burden of maintaining security in the occupied territories and in Israel falling on the Palestinian National Authority alone.... Let's side with the optimists and wait to see the results."

"A Modest Step On A Difficult Road"
London-based, internationally circulated Al-Sharq Al-Awsat maintained (10/25):
"The agreement...further consolidates the fundamental American role in Mideast peace.... President Clinton's direct involvement in the negotiations has put considerable moral pressure on the Israeli negotiator.... The Wye Plantation agreement was a courageous act, as a senior U.S. official stated, but it remains a modest step on a difficult road--the road to a just and lasting peace."

"Several Wyes Still Needed"
Jeddah-based, conservative Al-Madina's editorial emphasized (10/25):
"There are ...important portfolios that remain unresolved:..(such as) the occupied Golan Heights and Southern Lebanon, which needs several Wye Plantations."

 EUROPE

 BRITAIN:

"Oslo's Crumbs"
The independent Financial Times opined (10/26):
"Another year, another deal between Arab and Jew over how to share land. While any progress on this core issue of the Arab-Israeli conflict is to be welcomed, it is doubtful that the Wye accord...is a blueprint for peace. Nothing agreed at Wye indicates that Mr. Netanyahu and his nationalist colleagues are now persuaded that Israel's security requires the creation of a viable Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza, the only basis for an enduring peace.... Can the progress at Wye...light a path to real peace? The deal has one chance of leading somewhere: If the Clinton administration follows up its exertions of last week by strictly monitoring every step of Wye's implementation, as it has promised."

"The Wyes And Wherefores"
The centrist Sunday Independent had this lead editorial (10/25):
"Even now, true peace will not be decided by Friday's signing session at Wye, but by the good faith of both sides and by courageous political leadership. Credit is due to President Clinton, who needs it badly at present. What the Wye negotiations have shown yet again is not so much the wisdom of this or any other American president, but quite simply that progress in the Arab-Israeli dispute requires the United States to twist arms."

 FRANCE:

"Small Harvest At Wye Plantation"
Left-of-center Le Monde held (10/26):
"In diplomacy, the means are just as important as the end result.... The negotiations were painful, laborious and often brutal. Therefore the agreement should not hide what these negotiations revealed--that there is an ever growing gap of mistrust and incomprehension between the Palestinians and the Israelis.... The way the memorandum was achieved...does not augur well for its implementation in the future. Or of the next negotiations for the final status of the occupied territories.... Netanyahu goes home with the support of the Labor party...Arafat returns with some concrete dividends, and President Clinton has won a major diplomatic success. But what about peace? The dynamic of peace has made some headway. And that is better than the status quo."

"Between Fear And Hope"
Francois Bercoff argued in right-of-center France Soir (10/26):
"Since the historic agreement between Sadat and Begin, it is clear that a conservative prime minister can more easily convince the Israelis of accepting the need for concessions than a Labor Prime minister.... If one day the two people of the region decide to put the past behind and live side by side, we will also owe this to Bill Clinton, who showed once again that he is one of the best U.S. presidents in a long time."

 GERMANY:

"Netanyahu Shed Old Skins, Now Arafat Must Create Security"
Kurt Stenzel commented on ARD-TV's (national channel one) late evening newscast Tagesthemen (10/23):
"Netanyahu now risks a cabinet crisis, and even risks the survival of his government and political future. "Pressure from Washington must have been immense, and probably also Washington's promises. Netanyahu has shed old skins. Now it is up to Arafat to create security.... Time will tell whether the CIA's participation can be helpful in this respect. The CIA is the concession which Arafat had to swallow, since hardly any other organization in the Arab world is so hated as the U.S. intelligence service. Terror will again turn into a litmus test. The Palestinians and the Israelis must be willing to make peace despite terrorist attacks."

"Oslo III Agreement"
Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau argued (10/24):
"From a realistic point of view, the agreement resembles a thin cover which hardly conceals the distrust between Israelis and Palestinians, their aversions and mutual suspicions. Unlike the treaties that were signedby Rabin, Peres and Arafat, neither side indulged itself in the illusion of a new Middle East. Nevertheless, a new interim peace agreement was signed at Wye Plantation and de facto it was an Oslo III Agreement.... It is no longer based on the old formula of 'land for peace' but on a more autonomous West Bank in return for clearly defined security guarantees. After 19 months of an ice age between Israel and the Palestinians, this was great progress."

 ITALY:

"Still A Long Road To Peace"
Ugo Tramballi commented in leading business Il Sole-24 Ore (10/24):
"The compromise agreement at Wye Mills will have a decisive impact, not so much on the peace process per se, as much as on Arafat and Netanyahu. The agreement, in fact, will force the former to clarify once and for all the role of Hamas in the Palestinian national structure.... And a totally new political phase is beginning for Netanyahu. He will probably face the same problems with the extremist movement of the Jewish settlers as Arafat faces with Hamas: He may be forced to order to shoot."

"An Agreement Without Concessions"
Igor Man commented on the front page of centrist, influential La Stampa (10/24):
"The Wye Mills agreement is a 'small agreement,' achieved after nine days of negotiations conducted according to the old rules of a Middle East bazaar.... It has, however, its own intrinsic power as far as media are concerned, a strong 'image' impact.... More and more talks will be necessary in order to give a reasonable content to the hybrid mix of a sort of (partial) framework agreement and a sort of (reluctant) declaration of intent."

"The Nine Days Of The Best Clinton"
In left-leaning, influential La Repubblica, Vittorio Zucconi observed (10/25):
"For nine months we saw 'the worst of Clinton,' and for nine days we have seen 'the best of Clinton.'... It is not true that the Palestinians and the Israelis would have signed the agreement in any case.... Without Clinton, there would have been no agreement."

 BELGIUM:

"CIA Has Found New Role In Middle East"
Pierre Lefevre had this to say in independent Le Soir (10/26):
"The CIA has found a new role in the Middle East. The Wye Plantation agreement turns...the U.S. intelligence agency into the guardian angel of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. It will be closely involved in the enforcement of the security aspect of the agreement, an essential one in the eyes of the Israelis.... The U.S. agency has already been playing a discrete but essential role in the Middle East peace process. Its director, Mr. George Tenet has succeeded in creating confidence ties with both parties' security services and beyond.... The CIA has perhaps found in Wye Plantation a new justification for its existence."

 CANADA:

"Scorpions In A Bottle"
The conservative Ottawa Sun observed (10/25):
"For President Clinton, the talks were his usual political theatre, designed to boost Democratic fortunes in next month's elections and convince Americans he is an effective foreign policy president, which he is not.... How much baksheesh did Clinton have to dish out for even this agreement, ostensibly designed to reduce Arab-Israeli tensions but one which still leaves key issues unresolved?... Half of Israelis think a new interim peace agreement will give them less, not more security.... Two-thirds of Palestinians believe Israel reneged on the Oslo Agreement and will keep them prisoners in heavily guarded, South African-style bantustans, or tribal reserves. Increasing numbers blame Arafat for their plight and are turning to the radicals of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The Wye summit looked more like two scorpions trapped in a bottle than the dawn of a new era of Mideast peace."

 DENMARK:

"A Small Step"
Center-right Politiken had this editorial view (10/24):
"Bill Clinton's tireless diplomacy clinched the deal between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Nonetheless, it should be emphasized that the deal is, in reality, only a promise to implement the Oslo Agreement.... There is no doubt that the promise to let the CIA follow the Palestinian police's efforts to fight terrorism played an important role in the conclusion of the agreement.... Without a doubt, the agreement signals the end of Netanyahu's government. The right wing of the Knesset has already called him a traitor."

"Peace In The Middle East"
Center-right Berlingske Tidende noted (10/24):
"The greatest problems--including Jerusalem's future status--are not solved yet. There is a long road ahead to a genuine peace agreement. It is easy to list all the things that could go wrong, but that should not spoil our happiness that the Wye Plantation meeting has created new hope that long-term peace can be achieved in the Middle East."

 HUNGARY:

"Through Land Mines Towards Peace"
Foreign affairs writer Ferenc Kepecs observed in second largest circulation Nepszava (10/26):
"The agreement has finally been signed, and this is...a positive development. It has not, however, brought peace by all means, not even the continuing of the peace process, but makes them possible at least. Should the parties have gone home without a result from Wye Plantation, the peace process would have been stalled for good. The agreement has opened the 'road' to peace but this road is full of land mines."

 KAZAKSTAN:

"U.S. Efforts Productive"
Official Kazakh-language Yegemen Kazakhstan suggested (10/24):
"We should stress that [the Wye agreement] is a positive step. And we also should emphasize President Clinton's role as an intermediary in the process.... There ought to be a [more] important role for international society, especially for the United Nations, Right now only U.S. efforts in the region are productive."

 POLAND:

"Not The Last Agreement"
Ryszard Malik made these points in centrist Rzeczpospolita (10/24-25):
"The impasse in the Middle East peace talks lasted nineteen months, so the news about a forged agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority can be only good--regardless of how the peace process will evolve further.... "Friday's agreement creates hope for the establishment of a Palestinian state and has a chance of calming down the increasingly dissatisfied inhabitants of the Israeli-occupied lands.... The agreement [also] helps [Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu] change his unfavorable international image of a politician who is impossible to come to terms with. He may gain credit within the American Jewish community, which is dissatisfied with his ostentatious hostility toward the Palestinians and his open lack of sympathy toward Clinton.... The agreement gives substantial odds for stability and peace in the Middle East. But it is not going to be the last agreement."

 ROMANIA:

"Peace Has A New Chance, But For How Long?"
Pro-government Romania Libera opined (10/24):
"The peace process in the Middle East has been relaunched after more than 20 months of crisis. Peace has a new chance again, although we are tempted to wonder for how long? The important thing is that the agreement would allow...the initiation of negotiations on the final status of the Palestinian territories.... The most important compromise that led to the conclusion of this agreement was the cancellation of the anti-Israel clauses in the Palestinian National Charter.... The peace agreement will not only be useful to the Israelis or the Palestinians, but will equally serve...the purposes of the mediator of the negotiations, Bill Clinton.... Clinton could not afford a failure. He was compelled to show the voters that...he still managed to maintain his authority in the international arena."

 RUSSIA:

"Accord Averts War"
Aleksandr Shumilin remarked in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (10/24):
"Had the talks failed, the Middle East would have plunged into a new war. The Washington accords have averted war. The nine-day marathon talks have ended with the accords thanks to both sides being under strong pressure from the Americans."

"Accord Neither Full Nor Viable"
Vladimir Natalyin commented in reformist Izvestiya (10/24):
"With enormous labors, Netanyahu and Arafat have finally arrived at an agreement. The ten days the Israeli and Palestinian delegations have spent in Maryland have not shaken the world but they have added to the peace-makers' optimism.... The basic differences will hardly disappear at once, even if the Americans offer a hefty compensation. So you can't expect the agreement to be full or, more importantly, viable."

 SPAIN:

"The Israeli-Palestinian Accord"
Commercial La Gaceta opined (10/26):
"Will the mutual concessions [made to achieve the accord] serve to reduce tensions? This is doubtful indeed given the outright rejection of the agreement by extremists on both sides. Nevertheless, the accord is necessary, especially for the Palestinians, who would never have achieved their objectives using violence. But both sides must address serious problems starting with the dearth of water resources and the situation of the refugees, the latter seen [by some] as...the most difficult matter to be resolved...more important even than the status of Jerusalem."

"Reviving The Spirit Of Oslo"
Independent El Mundo noted (10/24):
"Several months will have to go by before we can judge whether the [terms of the Wye River Memorandum] will actually have their desired effect. Netanyahu may now be more disposed towards implementation given his personal involvement in this updating of the Oslo accords and, therefore, the peace process itself."

 SWEDEN:

"One Step Forward In The Mideast"
Stockholm's independent, liberal Dagens Nyheter judged (10/24):
"Prospects for peace are renewed. The agreement is a success for President Clinton, and it also illustrates the need for an active American engagement in the region.... With regards to Arafat and Netanyahu, it should be said that both have shown political courage.... The fact that an agreement was brought about is remarkable.... The American strategy was a successful one...but no one should hope for a miracle in the short run. Many of the issues, e.g., the status of Jerusalem, remain unsolved. But a major step forward was taken last Friday.... But ultimately only the parties involved can determine how big last Friday's step was."

 THE NETHERLANDS:

"Next Stumbling Block--Jerusalem"
Readers of conservative De Telegraaf saw this editorial (10/26):
"President Clinton deserves a lot of praise for achieving this accord, breaking the impasse which arose after Netanyahu's election. The greatest problem will no doubt prove to be the status of Jerusalem, which, according to the Oslo accords, should be clear by next spring."

"No Guarantees For Peace"
Centrist Algemeen Dagblad observed (10/26):
"Clinton got the political success he needs now that the interim accord has been signed, but that peace between Israel and the Palestinians is still far away. Netanyahu has given up land in exchange for Palestinian security promises, mainly hoping that Arafat will not proclaim a Palestinian state next May. For a year and a half Netanyahu only tried to kill the Oslo accords. Given the mistrust between him and Arafat there is no guarantee it will go better now."

 UKRAINE:

"Light At The End Of The Mideast Tunnel"
Oleksa Pidlutskyi judged in centrist Den (10/24):
"American observers believe that Israeli-Palestinian talks...have finally started moving ahead. Of course there are a lot of unresolved issues. American mediators insist that all of them must be resolved by May 4 of next year, the deadline established in the Oslo treaty. Whether the schedule will be obeyed is hard to believe, but the process has started."

 EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

 JAPAN:

"First Step Toward Final Reconciliation"
Conservative Sankei editorialized (10/25):
"We hail the accord as a first step toward achieving the final Israel-Palestinian reconciliation. Although President Clinton should be given credit for his energetic mediation efforts in the marathon talks, this accord should not be overestimated.... It is still not certain whether the accord will be implemented smoothly.... Further efforts must be made to finish 'final status' talks at which both Israel and the Palestinians find solutions to difficult problems."

 AUSTRALIA:

"One Step On The Arduous Path To Peace"
The national conservative Australian (10/26) noted:
"It is significant that Mr. Netanyahu has finally demonstrated a commitment to the search for peace and has established a relationship, however reserved, with Mr. Arafat.... Meanwhile, the talks that begin shortly on the really difficult questions of a lasting peace...will demand every reserve of courage, and compromise, available."

 HONG KONG:

"Modest Move For Peace"
Independent South China Morning Post had this editorial (10/25):
"For the first time in many years, it is possible to feel somewhat optimistic about...peace in the Middle East.... For his part, Mr. Clinton can take credit.... But the pressure to continue the peace process must not be allowed to diminish.... Until now...sincerity has been lacking from Mr. Netanyahu, but this agreement may mark a modest move in the right direction."

"Small Gains Are Writ Large In World Terms"
The independent Hong Kong Standard remarked (10/24):
"Much credit has to go to President Bill Clinton for working tirelessly over the last few days to see that the [Netanyahu and Arafat] did not return home empty-handed, thereby postponing the final peace negotiations to heaven knows when.... The Middle East is a crucial region producing substantial amounts of the world's oil. Unrest and instability here can create problems for all of us."

 INDONESIA:

"The Wye River Accord"
The leading, independent, English-language Jakarta Post commented (10/26):
"What was reached on Friday is only the beginning of a long strenuous journey toward a comprehensive peace in the Middle East."

 SOUTH KOREA:

"Land For Peace"
Conservative Chosun Ilbo's editorial held (10/26):
"Whether those forces in Israel and Palestine opposed to a settlement can be placated appears to be the greatest challenge now.... The Wye Mills Treaty would not have been possible if it were not for President Clinton's persistent mediation.... The success of the treaty depends on how impartially the United States will prod both sides in implementing the treaty."

 THAILAND:

"Peace Rests With Deeds"
Charoon Seree commented in largest circulation Thai Rath (10/26):
"Tangible 'enforcement of and compliance with' the agreement will prove to be an arduous and uphill task.... Much will depend on acceptance by politicians and peoples of both sides.... The agreement itself is riddled with many complexities...not to mention incidental factors, such as terrorism, waiting in the wings to undermine the peace process."

 SOUTH ASIA

 INDIA:

"Peace Deal, At Last"
An editorial in the nationalist Hindustan Times held (10/26):
"The interim accord... has resuscitated the comatose Middle East peace process.... The Clinton administration, of course, can pat itself on the back for having prevailed upon these intractable antagonists.... Once the technical details of the deal are known, Arafat should not have much difficulty in selling it to his people. Which is more than can be said for Netanyahu."

 PAKISTAN:

"New Peace Accord"
An editorial in the leading, mass-circulation Urdu-language Jang said (10/25):
"While the United States is terming the accord as a positive development in the Mideast peace process, its success and implementation depend on Israel's sincerity of effort, and Yasser Arafat's capability to convince the Palestinians."

 LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN

 ARGENTINA:

"A Strenuously Achieved Agreement"
Paula Lugones, leading Clarin's international columnist, wrote (10/24):
"The agreement thawed the peace process, which has been stalemated for the past twenty months.... Clinton played the role of a fervent reconciler.... Amid his stormy domestic situation, Clinton needed a victory before the elections in November. In addition, relations between Tel Aviv and Washington were at their worst moment.... Netanyahu's [appointment of Ariel Sharon as foreign minister] may bear fruit: the agreement signed by Sharon, may be better swallowed by the right wing, who already requested Netanyahu's head several times.... Yesterday's agreement saw the light after tremendous effort and ominously anticipates the fight during the final negotiation stages, where key issues will be at stake: the creation of a Palestinian state and the status of Jerusalem."

 BRAZIL:

"Will Accord Bring Lasting Peace?"
Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo's foreign affairs writer Sergio Malbergier argued (10/24):
"The peace accord signed with pomp at the White House is far from guaranteeing the peace between Israelis and Palestinians. This accord revives the 1993 Oslo agreement, but it exchanges the mutual trust for written guarantees and inspections by a third party, the United States, which does not guarantee its implementation. A great part of what was signed yesterday had already been agreed to in previous documents. Although the peace process has the support of the majority of the population, extremists sectors from both sides have already shown they have the power to interrupt them."