/ BARAK / 78 and refining our position on Jerusalem. I think Clinton expected a formal offer from us. Since I’d been guided by his request for a list of questions for Arafat, however, that is what we came to him with. As we’d discussed, I wanted finally to elicit some sign of whether Arafat, too, was ready to make difficult decisions. The questions were specific. “Will you accept an agreement that stipulates the following...” it began, and proceeded to outline the kind of peace we could accept and still hoped for. The points included not just Jerusalem, but areas I knew would also be sensitive for Arafat, such as the “right of return” and formal agreement to an end of conflict. We went further than before in some areas. One of the outer East Jerusalem neighborhoods would be under Palestinian sovereignty. The rest of the city would remain under Israeli sovereignty, but most of the other Arab villages would be subject to a system of Palestinian administration. The Haram al-Sharif, the mosque complex above the wall of the Jewish temple, would be under Palestinian “administrative and religious management.” We also suggested “special arrangements” implying a Palestinian presence in the Old City, but again under Israeli sovereignty. The questions envisaged eventual Palestinian control in the Jordan Valley, with an Israeli security zone for 12 years, rather than our proposal in pre-summit talks for 30 years. Then, explicitly, we proposed a question to Arafat to confirm my understanding with Clinton that the “right of return” would apply not to Israel proper, but to a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. Finally, the document said: “I understand that such an agreement constitutes an end of conflict.” After he read it, the President blew up. Far from the “bottom lines” he’d apparently hoped for, but which I’d never thought were expected at this stage, I seemed to be retreating from ideas Shlomo and Gili had presented in their all-night session with the Palestinians