Navigating the roadmap
By
Any cul de sac will, argues Ibrahim Nafie, be of Israeli making
No sooner did US Secretary of State Colin Powell leave Palestine on his way to Cairo than Israeli tanks supported by helicopter gunships rolled into Rafah, three more Palestinians were killed in Gaza and the Palestinians once more subjected to intolerable siege.
Such actions vividly capture the attitude of the Sharon government towards the US secretary of state's current peace drive. Powell came to the region expecting to hear the PA and Israel declare unconditional acceptance of the roadmap. While this was immediately forthcoming from the Palestinians, Powell met with nothing but evasiveness from the Sharon government, which, instead fed Powell a long list of conditions and dictates and, as a parting gesture of contempt, dramatically revoked the good will initiatives Powell had asked Israel to undertake towards the Palestinians in preparation for his arrival.
The roadmap, it must be remembered, is a plan sponsored by the four-party commission known as the Quartet which, in addition to the US comprises Russia, the EU and the UN, and thus reflects the determination of the international community to reach a negotiated settlement to this very complex conflict. In devising the roadmap its architects drew on all previously proposed ideas while taking pains to avoid the pitfalls that led to the collapse of earlier plans. They also made it clear that the roadmap must be implemented as it stands, that it is not open to negotiation. The government of Abu Mazen understood this and did not hesitate to signal its acceptance of the plan in full.
Not so Sharon, who told Powell that he was due to visit the US in 10 days and that he would give his answer to the US president in person. Could Powell have known in advance of the response he would receive from Sharon? And if so, why come to the region only to walk away empty handed? One cannot help but suspect that the surprise Powell received in Tel Aviv and the clash of wills between the Departments of State and Defence in Washington are not entirely unrelated. Could it be that the Israeli ultra-right colluded with its counterpart in the US administration at the expense of the "dovish" US secretary of state.?
Whatever the case, the behaviour of the Israeli government during and after Powell's visit underlines once again the fact that the current Israeli government can never be an effective peace partner. This is a government that is manoeuvering to buy time as it puts into place new realities on the ground, confident in its belief that it can bend the current US administration to its will. If it can hold things off until the end of the year, it thinks, White House attention will be diverted by the forthcoming presidential elections and the Arabs will be told once again to remain patient, this time until election year 2004 is over. At the time of the Madrid peace conference former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhaq Shamir famously said that he was ready to negotiate with the Arabs for 10 years before budging an inch from his position. Clearly, the Sharon government has adopted the same approach.
In the face of Israeli evasion, and in order to drive home our commitment to peace, the Arabs must affirm a number of principles:
First, as mentioned above, the roadmap represents the will of the international community and must be implemented as it stands. Furthermore, concerned parties must adhere to the principle of reciprocity it enshrines, especially as there are no guarantees that Israel will fulfill its side of the bargain once the Palestinians have fulfilled theirs.
Second, Palestinian factions must give the Abu Mazen government the opportunity to pursue the course opened by the roadmap. Towards this end Abu Mazen and the factions should reach an agreement in accordance with which all acts of armed resistance cease for a period of six months. The agreement should emphasise that all Palestinian factions are part of the Palestinian national entity and that resistance against foreign occupation is an inalienable and internationally sanctioned right. While affirming the value of resistance it will be understood that the voluntary freeze on the exercise of this right is intended to promote an avenue for realising nationalist aims that is more appropriate to current regional and international realities.
Third, the Arabs as a whole must put their full weight behind Abu Mazen in his drive to create a climate conducive to his government's current efforts. For its part Egypt is ready to continue its sponsorship of a Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue aimed at reaching specific agreements that will enable the government of Abu Mazen to meet its obligations under the roadmap.
Fourth, the US must work to guarantee a halt to all Israeli acts of aggression for a six month period. During this time the Palestinian security apparatus, which has been totally destroyed by Israeli occupation forces, must be rebuilt, a task to which Egyptian and Jordanian expertise can contribute much.
Fifth, Israel must cease its attempts to marginalise the popularly elected president of the Palestinian people. The US and Israel must further realise that attempts to sew discord between Arafat and Abu Mazen will prove futile. Abu Mazen has made it abundantly clear that Israel must lift the blockade on Arafat and that he will not leave Palestine until the Palestinian president's freedom of movement is fully restored.
Finally, the Quartet must establish a team of observers to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the roadmap. In ensuring that both sides adhere to their obligations under this plan we will bring closer the possibility of a just and viable peace as envisioned in the Arab initiative adopted in the Beirut summit in March 2002.
The recent behaviour of the Israeli government suggests that it will remain the primary obstacle to peace. Yet if the Palestinians succeed in playing their cards well they will have succeeded in exposing foot-dragging and deceit of the Israeli government. At this point, the world will call the US to account for its support of a renegade state bent on flouting the international will.
