topic by
John Calvin
8/10/2002 (9:18) |
|
TO OUR READERS
http://www.fmep.org/reports/2002/v12n4.html#6
President George W. Bush's June 24 speech confused and disappointed many who had hoped to hear a coherent plan for an Israeli-Palestinian peace that would break the current violent impasse. Instead, Bush demanded Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's departure, reform of the Palestinian Authority, and a crackdown on terrorism as preconditions for negotiations. Although Bush indicated that Israel would eventually have to withdraw from the territories it occupies, for the present he asks nothing of Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, whose forces now reoccupy the West Bank and have crippled Palestinian security and government institutions.
The lack of realism in Bush's one-sided approach is breathtaking. Yes, Palestinian institutions need reform and, ultimately, new leadership. It is naïve, however, to expect such developments without a parallel political process that resolves the issues of occupation, borders, refugees, settlements, Jerusalem, and Palestinian statehood.
What is needed is an American plan outlining solutions for these problems and a negotiating timetable. Such a plan is the only way to renew hope for peace and the only alternative to the violence that traumatized majorities on both sides of the conflict now support by default. Without such hope, Palestinians are unlikely to rally against terrorism, and Israelis will not challenge Sharon to compromise with the Palestinians or face electoral defeat.
One reason Bush has rejected such activism is his mistaken belief that pressing Israel to negotiate now would 'reward terrorism.' Yet postponing diplomacy leaves the initiative with the terrorists and extremists on both sides. The late Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin understood this when he said, 'We will fight terror as if there are no negotiations and negotiate as if there is no terror.' President Bush should resurrect Rabin's approach when his next speech is written.
Philip C. Wilcox, Jr.
|
|