In The Mideast, Giving Peace (Another) Chance
Israelis and Palestinians have always been better at making peace-deal promises than following through on them. As the latest peace conference gets underway this week in Annapolis, Md., Palestinians are pressing Washington to appoint a full-time monitor who would be tasked with assessing whether the two sides are living up to their promises on security and a settlement freeze in the West Bank, according to a Palestinian official involved in the process. The official, who did not want to be named discussing internal negotiations, said Palestinians wrote the issue into an early draft of a document that was to be approved in Annapolis. "The U.S. will monitor and judge the fulfillment of the commitments of both sides of the Roadmap [an American blueprint for reaching a peace deal between the Palestinian Authority and Israel]," the Palestinians wrote. But Israel balked at the idea, at least initially—just one of the disputes that prevented negotiators from agreeing on a joint declaration last week. (Some of the disputes were more substantive than others: one involved whether to call the declaration a "statement," as Israel wished, or a "document," which Palestinians preferred.)
The Bush administration has not had a permanent envoy assigned to the conflict since it drafted the Roadmap in 2003, and the results have been telling. Although the plan called for a halt to the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank—the heart of the future Palestinian state—the Jewish population there has since grown by nearly 20 percent, according to Israeli government data. In the past year, the number of West Bank settlers increased 5.8 percent compared with Israel's overall population growth of 1.8 percent. On the Palestinian side, a monitor would help ensure that President Mahmoud Abbas makes a genuine effort to crack down on militants, and not just those from his political rival Hamas. Israelis complain, for example, that while Palestinian security forces arrested members of Abbas's own Fatah group in September for plotting to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the suspects were then released, only to be rearrested later under pressure from Israel. "Unless the administration is prepared to get into the monitoring game and hold each side accountable, commitments will not be fulfilled," says Aaron David Miller, a former Mideast negotiator who's now at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Miller says a monitor must have enough clout to be capable of humiliating both sides into compliance. As an example, he mentions James Baker, the former secretary of State who has a record of pressuring Israel on settlement activity. But Baker probably has too much stature; Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice might worry that he would overshadow her. (Asked recently whether the State Department would appoint a special envoy, a senior administration official said that Rice fills the role herself—though critics say she has too much on her plate to engage in real-time monitoring.) Another person whose name comes up as a qualified candidate is Edward Djerejian, who served as ambassador to Israel and Syria and now runs Baker's Institute for Public Policy at Rice University in Texas. "You have to have an envoy who pushes forward the issues," Djerejian told NEWSWEEK. But he said he had not been approached about the subject, perhaps leaving the two sides to bicker alone over their statements. Or were they documents?
© 2007
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/01/2007 3:52:49 PM
Comment: It is a very wise move to move this peace process small steps at a time. Ease into peace as opposed to sudden change. Sudden change causes chaos. ie. assasination of Rabin in 1994 and Sharon's visit to the temple mount were events that have fueled divisivness. Whether this peace plan works or not we must continue to try and solve problems. Governments must encourage citizens of all backgrounds to get involved with organizations in their countries that develop policies that provide solutions. An enviornment must be created where social and economic reform in the Middle East can take place. I really think that all governments; Arab; Jewish, American, European, African should each have civilian committees that comprise of everyday people and religious leaders. These men and women will negotiate with their peers from other countries and share with eachother solutions to improve everyday life for themselves and their families. Could you Imagine a Palestinian doctor conversing with a Jewish doctor, a Palestinians religious leader discussing economics with a Jewish religious leader. Or a Palestinians woman discussing issues with a Jewish women. After meeting with eachother these committees of peace comprised of everyday people report to their governments and provide suggestions to ease gridlock. I really think that the more people that get involved in this process the better chance we have to achieve peace. Let's give our President some support now, he is trying. We must never let the forces of evil and divisivness stop the peace process.
Posted By: mfenwick @ 11/30/2007 10:36:05 PM
Comment: America is not the new Israel and we are not the new Israelites commissioned by God to spread the gospel of Americanism throughout the world via the military or Wal-Mart. Spain, Germany, France, Italy and England all tried their own versions of manifest destiny and failed. America will fail also. America has only itself to blame for 9/11. If it hadn't meddled in other countries' affairs none of that would have never happened. Explain to me why it is whenever an Arab nation commits an act of terrorism America yells out, "Murderer!", but whenever Israel commits an act of terrorism America mumbles, "Israel has a right to defend itself". Also tell me this: If there IS a God then why is our nation at war? How can you claim to worship the so-called Prince of Peace and vote for a warmongering president?
Posted By: radicalcenter @ 11/30/2007 4:50:46 PM
Comment: George W. Bush's obtain one really wonderful success that will enable him to be remembered in a positive light. It???s called ???his legacy???.
A reading of history tells us that the likelihood of success is very remote. Bill Clinton, the master of communications, was unable to bring Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak to agree on a peace settlement. George W. Bush is not known for is diplomatic talent. This AP analysis dated November 25 is worthwhile http://apnews.excite.com/article/20071125/D8T4Q05O0.html. How can he bring two groups that have been fighting for 60 years together in peace?
It is a nice gesture to bring all the Arab nations to this conference but the only two groups needed for peace are the Israelis and the Palestinians. As long as Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists continue to attack Israel there will not be a sustainable peace. The Palestinians do not have the will to stop the terrorists.
I expect that the Arab nations will demand land from Israel as a trade for peace. Israel has already withdrawn from southern Lebanon, the Sinai Peninsula, and Gaza but those withdrawals have not brought any peace. Will Israel???s withdrawal from the Golan Heights and all of the West bank territories bring peace? Sorry to say but I do not believe the Arabs will be satisfied until there is no state of Israel.