The legacy of Yitzhak Shamir During his visit to London as Israel's Foreign Minister in June 1985, Thatcher had a stormy encounter with Shamir over his refusal to compromise on the Palestinian question. Shamir was told that "Israel could not just stand back" while there was an opportunity for progress. The British Prime Minister feared that the status quo in the Arab-Israel arena would be perpetuated if the Likud were in charge of Israeli policy, with dangerous consequences for western interests in the region. In particular, there was concern that the Soviets would profit from regional instability. Thatcher became increasingly exasperated by the Reagan Administration's lack of support for Hussein and Peres. In April 1987, in his capacity as Israel's foreign minister in the national unity government, Peres had met secretly in London with King Hussein, with whom he reached a written agreement on procedures for an international peace conference between Israel and her Arab adversaries. A joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation was formed to represent the Palestinians. However, Shamir, now prime minister, was fiercely opposed to an international conference, and rejected the agreement. Thatcher pleaded with Reagan and US Secretary George Shultz to back the London Agreement, insisting that Shamir could not be allowed to veto a unique opportunity to resolve the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Thatcher was effectively asking the Americans to back Peres against Shamir. However, the Reagan Administration refused to support the London Agreement, maintaining that this would be viewed as interference in internal Israeli affairs. The London Agreement duly collapsed, and the Palestinian Intifada erupted in early 1988. A weakened King Hussein disengaged from the West Bank in August 1988, as the PLO gained in strength. Peres was bloodied and bruised and lost to Shamir in the November 1988 elections. Although Peres remained in the next coalition government that was formed, Shamir was very much the senior partner. Yet paradoxically, it was Shamir who emerged with an initiative of his own in the spring of 1989, although few in the Arab world took it seriously. The Shamir plan called for Palestinian elections which would result in local representation to negotiate a transitional period of self-rule. Shamir was finally welcomed as a prime minister to London in May 1989, in a bid to encourage a new policy of flexibility. However, within a few months, Shamir had caved in to rebels such as Ariel Sharon from his own Likud party, and the initiative was killed off. Peres became increasingly critical of Shamir for his negative attitude towards peace efforts. Shamir responded by firing Peres from the coalition, and a new right-wing government was formed. Thus, by the early months of 1990, Shamir's victory over Peres was complete. It may be true that Shamir attended the Madrid Peace Conference of 1991 following arm twisting from the Bush Administration. However, this did not reflect any change of heart on Shamir's part. He remained determined to strengthen Israel's control over the biblical heartland of the West Bank, known to Shamir and many Israelis as Judea and Samaria. In the intervening years, dovish and hawkish Israeli governments have come and gone. In 2012, stalemate has become entrenched, once again, in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. Israel's current Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is essentially a protégé of Shamir, and served under him as a Deputy Foreign Minister. He shares his belief in self-reliance and a suspicion of the Arab world. In fairness, Netanyahu has expressed his agreement, in principle, to the establishment of an independent Palestinian State - something that would have been unthinkable for Shamir. The main difference, perhaps, between the two men is that Shamir had a stronger capacity for withstanding outside pressure. Actions speak louder than words, however, and there is little evidence to show that Netanyahu is willing to travel significantly further than Shamir in regard to obtaining peace with the Palestinians. Netanyahu's obfuscation over Supreme Court orders to demolish illegal settlement outposts exemplifies this. For now, Shamir's legacy is in safe hands. Dr Azriel Bermant is a diplomatic historian, researcher and analyst specialising in foreign policy