Agreement is tantalisingly close between the Israeli government and the Palestinians on implementing the Wye River accord to swap land for security, opening the way next year for the final phase of negotiations on a settlement between them. Expectations had been high that agreement would be reached in time for signature yesterday in Alexandria in the presence of the US Secretary of State, Mrs Madelaine Albright. But a sharp disagreement over which prisoners to release has held matters up.
It would be too easy to dismiss this outstanding issue as tactical only, in keeping with the classic last minute brinkmanship so typical of these talks. Given the goodwill arising from Mr Ehud Barak's recent election victory it would appear irrational for a breakdown to occur on such a comparatively minor question. But there are deeper issues at stake.
Mr Barak is sticking by a pledge not to release Palestinian prisoners convicted of murdering Jews, prisoners who he regards as terrorists, especially those who support the Islamic fundamentalist movement Hamas. He is sensitive about hostile popular reaction if he agrees to such releases. For the Palestinian leadership most of the prisoners are regarded as freedom fighters and they are under equal pressure to secure their release as already agreed. They too have been criticised for failing to define which categories of prisoner would be set free. Precedents will be set here for the final stage of the negotiations.
It would indeed be a surprising and major setback were there to be a breakdown on the issue, especially since so much else has been agreed in recent days. The Wye agreement provides for an overall pullback from 13 per cent of Palestinian land by the Israelis to be completed in two phases in November and February next. Goodwill deals have been reached on a corridor between the West Bank and Gaza and the building of a major port and industrial park to cater for the Palestinians. A large number of important issues remain outstanding, including Jerusalem, the return of refugees and the total extent of Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories. Failure to agree on the prisoner releases would set back that agenda, making it unrealistic to expect final agreement by the end of 2000 as currently hoped for.
There is understandable reluctance on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides to rely overmuch on mediation by the United States, although Mr Yasser Arafat has endeavoured to use US pressure as a means of equalising relations with the more powerful Israelis. He is also anxious to keep his negotiations with them centre stage, rather than allowing the Syrians to take the initiative with Mr Barak over the Golan Heights and Lebanon. Mrs Albright acknowledged this when she said that it was for the parties themselves to make the hard choices. That would sustain the autonomy they established through the Oslo process by negotiating directly with one another.
The benefits of such an approach can be learned elsewhere, notably in Northern Ireland, where so much store is being put in Mr George Mitchell's forthcoming mediation. Prisoner release is an active issue here too. There are likely to be more comparisons drawn between the two peace processes in coming months.