Meaning: The quote by Natan Sharansky reflects a critical perspective on the Oslo Accords, a series of agreements between the government of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) that were signed in the 1990s. The central premise of the Oslo Accords was to establish a framework for achieving peace between Israel and the Palestinians by granting the Palestinian Authority limited self-governance in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Natan Sharansky, a prominent Israeli politician and human rights activist, is known for his skepticism regarding the Oslo Accords and their approach to dealing with the Palestinian leadership, particularly Yasser Arafat, who was the Chairman of the PLO and later became the first President of the Palestinian Authority. In his quote, Sharansky suggests that the Oslo process involved granting Arafat legitimacy, territory, weapons, and financial resources in the hope that he would use his power to combat terrorism and negotiate a lasting peace with Israel.

Sharansky's criticism reflects the deep-seated doubts that many Israelis and critics of the Oslo Accords harbored regarding the intentions and capabilities of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian leadership. The belief that Arafat and the PLO could be incentivized to abandon violence and embrace a peaceful coexistence with Israel through the concessions offered under the Oslo Accords was a contentious and divisive issue at the time, and it continues to be a subject of debate and analysis in the context of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Oslo Accords, signed in the early 1990s, represented a historic attempt to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiations and mutual recognition. The agreements led to the establishment of the Palestinian Authority as an interim governing body in parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with the ultimate goal of reaching a permanent peace agreement based on a two-state solution.

However, the implementation of the Oslo Accords faced numerous challenges and setbacks, and the optimism that initially surrounded the peace process gradually gave way to disillusionment and frustration. Critics, including Sharansky, argued that the concessions made to Arafat and the PLO, such as granting them control over territory, financial aid, and even allowing for the establishment of a Palestinian security force, did not lead to a genuine commitment to combat terrorism and promote peaceful coexistence with Israel.

Instead, the failure of the Oslo process to effectively address issues such as Palestinian terrorism, incitement, and the proliferation of weapons in the hands of militant groups contributed to a breakdown of trust and a resurgence of violence, particularly during the Second Intifada in the early 2000s. This period of intense conflict and bloodshed further fueled skepticism about the viability of the Oslo Accords and the ability of the Palestinian leadership to deliver on its promises of peace and security.

From Sharansky's perspective, the Oslo Accords represented a flawed approach that underestimated the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the nature of the PLO leadership under Arafat. The belief that granting legitimacy, territory, weapons, and financial resources to Arafat would lead to a genuine commitment to fighting terrorism and making peace with Israel was, in Sharansky's view, a naive and misguided assumption.

In the years following the signing of the Oslo Accords, the failure to achieve a comprehensive and sustainable resolution to the conflict has led to ongoing debate and reflection on the lessons learned from this historic peace initiative. The quote by Natan Sharansky encapsulates a critical perspective that highlights the challenges and shortcomings of the Oslo process, while also serving as a reminder of the complex and contentious dynamics that continue to shape the Israeli-Palestinian relationship.