A very bad deal

The "US initiative" asking Israel to withdraw its troops from 13.1 per cent of the occupied West Bank was originally Netanyahu's idea. He believed that the Palestinians would never accept his proposal, because it is a mockery of their expectations. More concretely, it is a violation of the Oslo agreement. Arafat, however, accepted the proposal; he knew Netanyahu would not give up a single inch, let alone 13.1 per cent, of Palestinian territory. Taken by surprise, Netanyahu has now decided he will withdraw Israeli troops from 10 per cent of the West Bank; an additional three per cent will remain under Israeli security control.

Ironically, the Americans supported the 13.1 per cent proposal, but when Netanyahu said no, Washington put pressure on the Palestinians to accept the new Israeli stand. In December, US, Palestinian and Israeli security officials had concluded a security agreement demanded by Netanyahu. The US found the deal fair, and so did Israel's top security officials; but Netanyahu rejected it because it called upon Israelis and Palestinians to refrain from supporting "terrorist" activities.

Netanyahu does not believe Israelis can engage in "terrorism", a label he reserves for the Palestinians. The massacre at the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron, or the slaughter of Palestinian and Lebanese resistance fighters outside Israel is not terrorism, therefore, but "self-defence." Of course.

As long as Washington does not identify the party which is actually blocking the peace process, the US envoy need not return to the region. Foreign Minister Amr Moussa said recently that no deal at all is better than a bad deal. And what Ross is offering is a very bad deal indeed.