Leader, June 26, 2002, Guardian

George Bush's statement on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict cannot accurately be termed a new policy. Nor is it a plan in any meaningful sense, certainly not a substitute for the Oslo process. It does not even furnish a road-map towards the longed-for ceasefire and a resumed dialogue. Mr Bush's speech does not represent the long-awaited, post-Clinton re-engagement of the US in Middle East mediation. On the contrary, by making a series of impracticable and unrealistic demands of the Palestinians while accepting without question the numbingly destructive policies of Ariel Sharon's government, it ends any remaining pretence of US impartiality.

Mr Bush's suggestion of broad Arab and European support for his approach is plainly untrue, especially with respect to his ostracism of Yasser Arafat. His premise, that his ideas if adopted would restore hope to ordinary Palestinians, will be cruelly misleading while Mr Sharon is allowed to act as an arbiter of what constitutes progress. In several key respects, in fact, Mr Bush's proposals are wholly regressive. To say this is disappointing would be an understatement. After 18 months of dilly-dallying in the Middle East, and an interminable internal administration debate, Mr Bush has failed to rise to the challenge or even, it would seem, to comprehend its true nature. No peacemaker he, and no statesman either. This was not a "vision" of future harmony. It was more a thingy-eyed squint, distorted by his domestic constituencies, his obsessive, catch-all definition of "terrorism", and by other priorities such as Iraq, at a basic issue of peace and justice that, despite his sympathetic words, he cannot or will not grasp.

The principal victims of this signal failure of American leadership, as in the past, will be the Palestinians. The onus is entirely on them to conjure up sweeping institutional and judicial reforms that, while intrinsically worthwhile, must be achieved in the teeth of an expanding and now US-approved military occupation. That same Palestinian Authority whose structures and resources were systematically trashed by the Israeli army during incursions earlier this year is now somehow expected to manage a rapid transition to incorruptible, democratic governance. The Palestinians are also told that they must depose Mr Arafat and elect new representatives "not compromised by terror". While the replacement of Mr Arafat by more able and stronger-willed leaders would indeed benefit the Palestinian cause (in part by curbing the extremists and the bombers), this is not something which Washington can sensibly achieve by diktat. Nor will the cynically proffered blandishments of new international funding do more, at this point, than add insult to injury. For, in defiance of practical reality and hard-won peacemaking experience from Dili to Derry to Dayton, Mr Bush insists that all of the above must be done, and seen to be done, before there can be a meaningful bilateral and multilateral process, let alone recognition of a Palestinian state. And even then, such a state would only be a provisional entity, fatally dependent on voluntary Israeli concessions in respect of its final borders.

It is at this point that Mr Bush can most plainly be seen to be going backwards. This interim statelet would occupy, at most, 40% of the West Bank land seized by Israel in 1967. And who could guarantee that Mr Sharon would not seek to render interim into permanent? Mr Bush makes much of his support for UN resolutions 242 and 338, of his hope that Israeli settlement land-grabs will cease, of his wish to oversee a regional solution. But all this has been said before by his administration. What is on offer now to the Palestinians, subject to stringent conditions, is far less than was on the table at Taba in January 2001 and so foolishly let slip by Mr Arafat. Yet even in such reduced circumstances, Mr Bush provides no tools for the job. His secretary of state, Colin Powell, has put off plans to visit the region. No special US envoy has been charged with pursuing Mr Bush's ideas. The peace conference promoted by Mr Powell is indefinitely postponed. There is no timetable and, crucially, no immediately persuasive incentive for extremists to stop the daily killing. The conclusion must be that Mr Bush and his senior advisers, excluding the hapless Mr Powell, do not actually expect any progress and hope effectively to freeze the conflict on Israel's terms while absolving the US of Arab blame.

Sad to say, with his vapid talk of a "vision", Mr Bush has created a vacuum, confused the issues, ducked responsibility, and set back the cause of peace. Forget Mr Arafat for a moment. Americans and Israelis also deserve better leaders.

Reproduced from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/
story/0,7369,744063,00.html