Haaretz
Nisan 2, 5765
Meetings between the prime
minister of Israel or the head of the Palestinian Authority and the
president of the United States are liable to amount to nothing more than
polite smiles and pats on the back along with press conferences where
unequivocal and totally meaningless commitments to peace are sounded, in
accordance with the Bush vision and the road map peace plan, despite the
fact that none of the dates mentioned in the road map are relevant
anymore. On the other hand, if Bush wants, these meetings could be very
productive and have a positive impact on the diplomatic maneuvering of the
coming months.
Bush can address the main problems on the two sides:
Despite relative quiet, the government of Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) still
appears to be too weak, his security mechanisms have yet to be merged and
there is no real attempt being made to collect weapons from the various
organizations.
Sharon, on his part, has not implemented his
commitment from Sharm el-Sheikh and has not allowed Abu Mazen to
demonstrate to his public that everyday life has improved. Contrary to the
commitments in the road map, Sharon is continuing to build in the
settlements, and even recently resurrected the plan for massive
construction between Jerusalem and Ma'aleh Adumim, a plan that would
eliminate the possibility of establishing a contiguous Palestinian state
in the framework of a final status accord. The legal status of the Gaza
Strip after the Israeli withdrawal is not sufficiently clear and the
status of the northern West Bank is even more hazy; no one knows what the
Palestinians will be permitted to do there.
The first stage of the
road map was supposed to last for a few months and end in May 2003. Both
sides circumvented its terms: The Palestinians preferred an internal
cease-fire to a war against terror, and Israel preferred a withdrawal from
Gaza to a settlement freeze. The United States, on its part, did not
continually monitor the situation on the ground, and each side blames the
other for failing to implement the road map.
No one knows when the
second stage of the road map is supposed to start, but it is clear to
everyone that it leads to a potential confrontation: Sharon insists that
during this stage there will be negotiations for a Palestinian state with
"temporary borders," while Abu Mazen argues that such negotiations are
just one option in the road map and that he does not intend to fall into
the trap of a permanent interim accord. He will only agree to negotiations
if they pertain to a final status agreement.
Bush can untangle this
knot. It is completely justified to demand that Abu Mazen merge the
Palestinian security forces into three organizations and collect
unauthorized weapons. It would also be appropriate to provide him with a
letter equivalent to the one Sharon received on April 14. This letter
would clarify to the Palestinians how the United States envisions the
future Palestinian state.
The U.S. should demand of Sharon that he
fulfill his commitments regarding the unauthorized outposts and a
settlement freeze. He should also be asked to define exactly what the
legal status of northern Samaria will be after the settlements are
evacuated from that area.
Bush, on his part, can give both sides an
updated timetable for the road map. Having already declared that he would
like to see a Palestinian state established before the end of his second
term, the map could be updated to have the final accord implemented by
2008. He will ask both sides to begin negotiations on the second stage of
the road map, and since Abu Mazen does not intend to declare a Palestinian
state within temporary borders, this interim stage could be implemented
through a third "redeployment" in accordance with the interim agreement of
1995. Once there is an agreement on new borders for the Palestinian
Authority, negotiations on a final accord could commence. In light of the
fact that violations by both sides constitute one of the central problems
in the implemention of the road map, it is important for Bush to establish
the international monitoring mechanism that is stipulated in the road map
but that has never been established.
All of these things are
possible. None of them, ostensibly, contradict the basic positions of the
Americans, Israelis or Palestinians. All are anchored in the road map and
agreements signed in the past between the sides. The only question is how
serious Bush takes the commitment he took upon himself - to assist in
bringing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to an end. During his first term
in office, he contributed very little to advance this process. In his
second term, he still has a period of grace.