The last time Israel and Syria talked peace, in 2000, Ehud Barak was the Israeli prime minister, Hafez el-Assad was the Syrian president, and Bill Clinton was the American president. Clinton by then had met Assad twice and spoke to him at length by phone. He was convinced he could edge Assad toward a peace deal. So was Barak.

Why the 2000 Talks Broke Down

But Assad was a 100 percenter: he would not settle for less than a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, which Israel has occupied since 1967. That meant a return to pre-1967 borders. It also meant granting Syria access to the Sea of Galilee again.

In 2000, talks broke down over that detail. Israel wasn’t willing to give Syria access to the Sea of Galilee. Israel wanted to hold on to some 20 square kilometers of the Golan Heights to keep Syria off the Sea’s waterline. To Israel, it was a matter, allegedly, of security. To Syria, access to the Sea was a matter of sovereignty. The talks collapsed.

New Actors, Same Issues

Today, Hafez el-Assad is dead, replaced by his son, Bashar. Barak is Israel’s defense minister. He’s angling for the prime ministership, it’s the administration of prime minister Ehud Olmert that’s in charge, and Olmert’s credibility is in tatters. Clinton is long gone, replaced by the almost-lame-duck George W. Bush, who’s made his impassiveness about the Middle East peace process a virtual matter of policy (he banned the use of the phrase “peace process” early in his administration and refused to get personally involved in brokering peace between Israel and its neighbors).

Yet there’s talk of peace between Israel and Syria again.

On Wednesday, Syria and Israel announced that they negotiating a settlement, although not directly. Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan , is mediating the talks at undisclosed locations in Turkey. The locations are in the plural because the Israelis and Syrian negotiators have not agreed to direct talks under the same roof. What Israel and Syria Want

That could prove to be a problem: One of the obstacles to peace in the 1990s was Assad’s refusal to hold direct talks with Israel. So was his refusal to offer guarantees to Israel over water, security and peace. By security and peace Israel doesn’t just mean guarantees of peace on its border with Syria. It means a distancing between Syria and Iran, which would also mean a distancing between Syria and Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. Those are the issues Israel is still bringing to the table.

Syria’s issues are also unchanged: complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, complete dismantling of Israeli settlements (which are illegal anyway), and return to the 1967 borders, including access to the Sea of Galilee.

The difference this time is in the leadership. Bashar al-Assad is, like his father, wily and unpredictable, but like his father he’s no loon. He knows what he’s doing. And the pressure isn’t on him to produce a deal as much as it is on Israel, whose security issues in all the occupied territories, the Golan included, are straining the state to the breaking point.

Far-Reaching Consequences of a Deal

A deal is possible. Obviously, it’s to be hoped for. But its substance will be in the details. The Golan Heights is the symbolic bargaining chip. Much more is at stake, including Israel’s relationship with Syria (will the two countries agree to a peace treaty in earnest, like the one between Egypt and Israel in 1979, and full diplomatic relations?), and Syria’s relationship with Hezbollah and Iran.

The outcome of these talks between Israel and Syria could redefine the power grid in that part of the Middle East—for good or ill, depending on whose perspective you go by.

See Also:

• What Are the Golan Heights?
• Syria, the Golan, and Peace with Israel
• The Egyptian-Israeli Disengagement Agreements of 1974 and 1975

How the Mideast Press is Covering the Talks:

• Haaretz, the left-leaning Israeli daily
• Syria Today, official Syrian news organ (see second item)
• Jerusalem Post, the right-leaning Israeli daily