Just how difficult it will be to negotiate the much-ballyhooed
"roadmap" to peace in the Middle East was summed up by Israel’s prime
minister, Ariel Sharon, after the Israeli cabinet recently approved the
plan with reservations. Sharon referred to the disputed territories
using the word occupation.
An immediate firestorm of protests broke out, including a scolding
by Israel’s attorney general because Sharon failed to use the accepted
term, disputed. The prime minister quickly backpedaled by saying he had been misunderstood.
In accepting the roadmap designed by the United States, UN, European
Union, and Russia, Israel added fourteen "Roadmap Remarks," which it
considers imperative to implementing the plan.
The roadmap, as drawn up by the Quartet, includes three phases. Here are summary observations of the central points.
Phase I: Ending Terror and Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions.
Phase I calls on the Palestinians to affirm Israel’s right to exist,
cease all violence against Israelis, end incitement, institute
political reform and free elections, introduce a credible draft
constitution, and create unified Palestinian security services.
Israel is called on to withdraw from Palestinian areas occupied
since September 28, 2000; freeze all settlement activity; end
deportations of terrorists; cease demolishing the property of
terrorists; resume security cooperation with Palestinian counterparts;
and facilitate freedom of movement for Palestinian officials and
citizens.
Arab states are to cut off public and private funding and all other
forms of support for groups supporting and engaging in violence and
terror.
Phase II: Transition—June 2003–December 2003.
The focus is on the creation of an independent Palestinian state
with provisional borders and attributes of sovereignty in preparation
for a permanent-status settlement. This action is to be taken when the
Palestinian people decisively confront terror and build a practicing
democracy with tolerance and liberty as fundamental elements in their
society.
Phase II is to begin after Palestinian elections and end with the
creation of a provisional state in 2003, if Quartet monitors are
satisfied that all conditions have been met.
An international conference is to be initiated by the Quartet to
undertake issues regarding an inclusive, comprehensive Middle East
peace, including settlement of issues between Syria, Israel, and
Lebanon.
The creation of the Palestinian state is to be launched at this
conference and enhance prior agreements, including Palestinian area
contiguity and further action of settlements.
An important issue in Phase II is enhanced international involvement
in monitoring the transition, with the active, sustained, and
operational support of the Quartet.
Quartet members will, at this stage, promote international
recognition of the Palestinian state, including possible UN membership.
Phase III: Permanent-Status Agreement and End of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict—2004–2005.
Featured in this conclusive stage of the process will be a second
international conference convened by the Quartet at the beginning of
2004. In 2005 the envisioned permanent-status resolution, based on UN
resolutions 242, 338, and 1397, will be presented. Included in the
resolution will be the status of permanent borders, Jerusalem,
refugees, and settlements. It also will support progress toward
comprehensive agreements with Syria and Lebanon.
Finally, the roadmap becomes reality in ending the "occupation" that
began in 1967 and includes an agreed, just, fair, and realistic
solution to the refugee issue. It also incorporates a negotiated
resolution on the status of Jerusalem that takes into account the
religious concerns of both sides; protects the religious interests of
Jews, Christians, and Muslims worldwide; and fulfills the vision of two
states: Israel and sovereign, independent, democratic, and viable
Palestine living side by side in peace and security.
Reactions and Reservations
Reaction to the roadmap is divided between the near-euphoric, the
bitterly opposed, and those somewhere in between who hope for the best
but simply don’t think the plan can ever be implemented.
Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz went on record early to say it
is bad for Israel. He later told Israel Radio that the Cabinet vote to
sign on to the plan was not an endorsement of the Quartet’s actual
roadmap but rather of the concept, taking into account the government’s
fourteen objections. These fourteen points relate to issues considered
essential to Israel’s participation in the roadmap process.
Israel insists that future settlement must by reached between the
two parties in accordance with President George W. Bush’s vision
articulated in his June 24, 2002, address.
The focal point is the national security of the Jewish state, based
on the performance of a new and radically different Palestinian
leadership. In other words, the Palestinians must clearly demonstrate
they intend to keep their promises and not drag Israel into another
morass of "paper for performance" disasters, as they have in the
past—Palestinians promise; Israelis perform.
The terrorist infrastructure must be destroyed. Rather than being
ignored or somehow brought into the process, Islamist radical elements,
such as Hamas, which maintain their determination to destroy Israel,
must be eliminated.
Israel also insists that the Saudi plan (UN resolution 1397 calling
for a return to the pre-1967 borders) not be included in the
settlement. If Israel is to have secure borders, those borders must be
negotiated, not subjected to arbitrary decisions made by the Saudis,
Palestinians, or any outside entity.
Israel must continue to exist as a Jewish state; thus Palestinians
must relinquish their claim of the "right of return." Although Israel’s
freeze on settlements and evacuation of Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza
Strip remain up-front matters in the roadmap, the Palestinian refugee
issue is allowed to be dealt with later. For Israel to be evicted from
the territories while Palestinians can still negotiate for an invasion
of Arab "refugees" into Israel proper is totally unacceptable.
Finally, Arab states are asked to assist rather than hinder the process through the condemnation of terrorist activity.
Overcoming the obstacles inherent in the Quartet’s plan seems, in
many respects, all but insurmountable. In the final analysis, only the
Israelis and Palestinians will have the final word.