for direct negotiations is a trap. As a high-ranking Egyptian official put it to me: "What does Israel want from us? Only recognition of its lawful existence. We, on our part, have many concrete demands-retreat from the cease-fire lines, repatriation of refugees, and so forth. If we agree to direct peace negotiations, we already do accord Israel recognition. In other words, we are giving you in advance what you want, without receiving anything in return. After making such a mistake, Israel could say, at the negotiating table, that it does not want to concede anything. Therefore, secret negotiations by mediators must come first. We must know what Israel wants to give up in return for recognition, before any Arab leader can make any open move."
Thus a new vicious circle is formed-one which allows the Israeli and Arab governments to postpone everything.
This postponement is also freezing debate in Israel itself, with the unfortunate result that no one knows where public opinion really stands. The struggle between the adherents of annexation and federation cuts across nearly all the parties. The propagandists for a Greater Israel are more vociferous, and command much more support in the mass-circulation press, but the adherents of a Palestinian federation are far more numerous and influential than would seem at first glance. Significantly, many of them belong to the higher echelons of the Israeli Army which, quite unlike most armies, is one of the least chauvinistic and most sober factors on the Israeli scene. The military governors who administer the occupied territories of Palestine, as well as many higher civilian government officials, in general advocate a more liberal and farsighted policy than many politicians and publicists.
A few weeks ago, I proposed in the Knesset a resolution calling for immediate steps to create a Palestinian Republic. The first paragraph read: "The whole of Palestine is the homeland of two nations-the Hebrew nation and