Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's brokering of an Israeli-Palestinian
agreement on border crossings into the Gaza Strip is a good step
for the economic development of Gaza and a positive sign of American
engagement in the peace process. But the real test for the U.S.
administration's commitment to this peace process isn't the Gaza
Strip -- it's Israel's settlement expansion and its separation plan
for the West Bank.
After a shooting
attack on Israeli settlers in the West Bank last month, Israel responded
by banning Palestinian movement in private vehicles on main roads
in the West Bank. The United States called for lifting of these
restrictions but has failed to grasp their implications as a sign
of how Israel plans to separate itself from a Palestinian state
and how this separation will affect Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas's efforts on security reforms.
The restriction on Palestinian use of West Bank roads shows how
Israel plans to separate Palestinians from Israeli settlers while
maintaining many settlements scattered throughout the occupied West
Bank. In September 2004, Israel launched a roads-and-tunnels plan
consisting of approximately 24 tunnels and 56 roads that will shift
Palestinian traffic away from Israeli settlements and off settler
roads.
Under this plan, Israel's 410,000 settlers will enjoy the use
of main roads and good highways, while many of the roads or tunnels
planned for the 2.2 million Palestinians will be narrow and indirect
and will traverse hilly areas -- making them ill suited for building
an economically viable Palestinian state. The plan enables Israel
to remove checkpoints and thus claim that it is improving the lives
of the Palestinians, even as it tightens the noose around Palestinian
areas and diminishes the land remaining for a future state.
The planned location of these tunnels and roads, combined with
settlement expansion, will result in a Palestinian "state" broken
up into three parts on 54 percent of the West Bank, with a citizenry
denied access to sufficient land and water resources for an adequate
standard of living.
Abbas met with President Bush last month in part to ask that
the United States ensure that Israel abide by its obligations under
the "road map" peace plan to freeze settlements and dismantle outposts.
President Bush reaffirmed these Israeli obligations but would not
provide a timetable for insisting on their implementation. He also
expressed support for Abbas's rejection of terrorism and pledged
to help the Palestinian Authority end attacks, dismantle terrorist
infrastructure and maintain law and order. But unfortunately the
Bush administration's unwillingness to tackle settlement and road
construction with Israel undermines those efforts.
To end violence, the Palestinian president must continue with
security reform and ensure accountability. He must also enjoy legitimacy
and the confidence of his people in his ability to end the Israeli
occupation and deliver, nonviolently, a viable Palestinian state.
Israel's settlement and road construction and the lessons of recent
history bode ill for his efforts. During the Oslo peace process
(1993-2000), a period of relatively little violence, Israel increased
its settler population by more than 72 percent and housing units
by 52 percent. According to Israeli reports, the decrease in the
rates of expansion of settlements from 7 to 9 percent in the 1990s
to 4 to 5 percent in the past few years was due, in part, to violence.
Israel's unilateral, as opposed to negotiated, evacuation from Gaza
reinforced this message. What, then, is the message about the rule
of law and violence? It is a message that neither the Palestinian
Authority nor the United States wants delivered.
Two days after the Bush-Abbas meeting, an unnamed State Department
official indicated that Israeli and Palestinian obligations under
the road map are not of equal importance -- the Palestinian Authority's
commitment to fight terrorism is more crucial than Israel's obligation
to freeze settlements. This U.S. approach of conditioning an Israeli
settlement freeze on Palestinian performance is destroying the chances
for Abbas to prove to his people that nonviolence and negotiation
work. This same approach contributed to the collapse of Abbas's
government in August 2003.
President Abbas needs to convince his people in the lead-up
to the January 2006 parliamentary elections that ending violence,
including violence against settlers as occurred last month,
will bring an end to Israeli settlement and lead to a viable
Palestinian state. President Bush is right that the Palestinian
Authority must earn the people's confidence by holding elections,
and win Israel's confidence by rejecting and fighting terrorism.
But for Abbas to be successful, he must be able to deliver positive
results, not more Israeli unilateral actions. Only the United
States has the power to persuade Israel to stop its construction
of roads and settlements.
---
The writer served as an adviser to the Palestinian team negotiating
with Israel on settlements and roads policy. She is a research fellow
in the Sir Joseph Hotung Program on Law, Human Rights and Peace-Building
in the Middle East at the University of London.
(c) Copyright 2005. Washington Post
MERIP
OP-EDS
A Country at a Crossroads The Austin-American Statesman (Austin, Texas) November 9, 2007
Kamran Asdar Ali
"A
very frank discussion"— so President Bush described
his Nov. 7 telephone
conversation with Pervez Musharraf, four days after the Pakistani
general
imposed a state of emergency and dissolved the high court expected
to rule
his continued presidency unconstitutional. And frank the discussion
probably
was: In the face of spirited protest in Pakistan, and a querulous
press in
Washington, back-channel pressure succeeded in persuading Musharraf
to
promise parliamentary elections. Yet the generous U.S. aid earmarked
for
Pakistan — on top of nearly $10 billion since 2001 — is
quite evidently not
at risk.
What may be at risk is Musharraf's tenure as head
of the military government. Full
story>>
The
war debate in Washington is bogged down. Partisan rancor is one
reason why, and bipartisan desire for US hegemony in the oil-rich
Persian Gulf is
another. But many Americans are vexed by a nobler concern: that
a
“precipitous” US departure from Iraq would leave intensified
civil war,
ethnic-sectarian cleansing and massive refugee flows in its wake.
This
concern is legitimate. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that Iraq’s
civil war
and humanitarian emergency have grown steadily worse as the US
military
deployment there wears on. Full
Story>>
Should
the United States, seeking to recalibrate the balance between
security and liberty in the "war on terror," emulate
Israel in its treatment of Palestinian detainees? That is the position
that Guantanamo detainee lawyers Avi Stadler and John Chandler
of Atlanta, and some others, have advocated. That people in U.S.
custody could be held incommunicado for years without charges,
and could be prosecuted or indefinitely detained on the basis of
confessions extracted with torture is worse than a national disgrace.
It is an assault on the foundations of the rule of law. Full
Story>>
There
is an oft-told Palestinian allegory about a family who complained
their house was small and cramped. In response, the father brought
the farm
animals inside -- the goat, the sheep and the chickens all crowded
into the
house. Then, one by one, he moved the animals back outside. By
the time the
last chicken left, the family felt such relief they never complained
of the
lack of elbow room again. Full
Story>>
