|
|
 |
Israel and Palestine to Let George Bush Go in Peace
// They are ready to reach agreement before his presidential term is over
The Mideast Peace Conference, which is an official beginning of peace talks on creating the Palestinian state, ended yesterday in Annapolis, Maryland. Both Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said it was a landmark event, and, despite expectations, agreed to sign a peace treaty before the end of 2008. Hardly anyone believes it will come true. However, in the situation of growing confrontation between Iran and the U.S., the Mideast Conference acquires additional meaning. RIA Novosti observer Nargiz Asadova reports from Annapolis, specially for Kommersant.
George Bush’s Dream
Over 700 journalists from around the world gathered on Tuesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis. After the personal search procedure, the journalists were carried in buses to a ‘storage center’ – to U.S. sea-soldiers’ stadium, where working places had been organized for the reporters. A huge screen in the stadium arena’s center was to broadcast U.S. President George Bush’s speech on the agreements reached at the Mideast Peace Conference. Only the journalists from Bush’s pool were allowed into the conference hall where the president spoke; they had special White House passes.
Almost no one believed that the U.S. president’s talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas would end in a breakthrough in the Arab-Israeli conflict’s peaceful settlement. By 11 a.m. there spread rumors that the Olmert-Abbas joint statement would not be signed on Tuesday, and that an additional negotiations day was needed.
Meanwhile, Bush, accompanied by Olmert and Abbas, appeared in the conference hall. They turned to the cameras and firmly shook hands.
“That’s it! Bush shakes hands with confronting parties. That’s the shot for the sake of which Bush started all this,” exclaimed a journalist next to me. “He wants to remain in history as a peacemaker like Clinton or Carter.”
“I’m about to read a… statement that was… agreed upon by our distinguished guests: the representatives of the government of the state of Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, represented respectably [respectively] by Prime Minister Ehuod Olmert and President Maha…Mahahumad Abbas,” began George Bush. Apparently, the U.S. president was nervous, because he managed to mispronounce the names of both politicians, with whom he had been in talks for the last few days, even while reading out his written speech.
Anyway, it turned out that Bush had succeeded at making the parties sign a joint statement on their striving towards peaceful coexistence of Israel and Palestine. Most importantly, the joint statement sets the time frame for the upcoming talks between the two Mideast states. In accordance with the agreement reached in Annapolis, the first meeting between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators is to take place on December 12, 2007. Later on, Olmert and Abbas are to meet every two weeks, so as to sign the Israel-Palestine peace treaty by the end of 2008. The parties agreed to create a “U.S.-Palestinian-Israeli mechanism for the Road Map’s consistent implementation, headed by the U.S.”.
Unexpected Peace
Before the conference in Annapolis, Israel’s authorities by no means wanted to sign a joint document setting the time frame for the future talks. When I asked why PM Olmert had changed his viewpoint, Israeli delegation member Yaron Gamburg answered: “There is no big contradiction in Olmert’s current position. Israel is against strict time frame because it puts unnecessary pressure on both parties. However, Olmert had said before the conference in Annapolis that Israel wants to sign the peace treaty before George Bush’s presidential term is over.”
Meanwhile, having finished reading the joint declaration, the U.S. president spoke on:
“I believe now is precisely the right time to begin these negotiations -- for a number of reasons. First, the time is right because Palestinians and Israelis have leaders who are determined to achieve peace. […] Second, the time is right because a battle is underway for the future of the Middle East -- and we must not cede victory to the extremists. […] Third, the time is right because the world understands the urgency of supporting these negotiations. We appreciate that representatives from so many governments and international institutions have come to join us here in Annapolis -- especially the Arab world,” said Bush.
Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas was the next to speak. He could not refrain from thanking “Dr. Condoleezza Rice” (and not George Bush) for contributing to the Middle East crisis’ settlement. “[…] our region stands at a crossroad that separates two historical phases, pre-Annapolis phase and post-Annapolis phase,” said Abbas. In his turn, Ehud Olmert took advantage of the presence of leaders of Arab states, the majority of which does not recognize the state of Israel, in the same conference hall with him, and said “there is not a Muslim state with which Israel would not want to establish diplomatic relations”.
After the Annapolis conference’s key participants delivered their statements, heads of delegations took part in three sessions behind closed doors. The sessions were headlined “International Support for Peace Process”, “Institutional Reforms and Infrastructure Building”, and “Towards Universal Peace in the Middle East”. The latter touched upon the relations between Israel and Syria, Lebanon, and the Arab world in general. These sessions passed in round table format, and Condoleezza Rice was the moderator. Foreign ministers of the states participating in the conference spoke one by one, declaring their initial stands on this or that issue. “There were no negotiations there. Round table participants did not respond to their counterparts’ statements, and did not enter discussion. Every speech ended with general applause,” said a diplomatic source. Thus, the Syrian delegation head said his country demands the return of the Golan Heights without preliminary conditions and the return to 1967 borders. The diplomat insisted there is no point in beginning to normalize relations with Israel before the Golan Heights are returned.
“No one believes that peace talks failure is one of the possible prospects,” summed up Condoleezza Rice, adding that the Israel-Palestine peace treaty is among the U.S. national interests.
Everyone against Iran
George Bush also met one-on-one with Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas yesterday in Washington. However, diplomatic sources said that Olmert and Bush this time discussed the issue of Iran’s influence spreading in the region. “Apparently, the Middle East issue starts with letter ‘i’, but ends with letter ‘n’. The problem is no longer with Israel, but with Iran. I suppose the Arab states understand that the Arab-Israeli peaceful settlement is necessary as a part of their efforts to solve the Iranian issue,” said a source.
The presence of all Arab leaders at the conference in Annapolis was an important sign that the Arab world stands with Mahmoud Abbas. Moreover, it also showed to Iran that the U.S., the EU, and the Arab states can stand together in solving the Middle East issues.
Meanwhile, the Arab leaders hesitated till the last moment with coming to Annapolis. Almost all members of the Arab League lengthily considered the situation, and decided to support the U.S. peace initiative just two days before the conference, after coming to a conclusion that the summit will do more good than harm. However, not everyone, even in the U.S., believes the Arab leaders’ coming to Annapolis can weaken Iran’s and pro-Iran forces’ positions in the region. It is well-known that U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney was against the conference. According to David Wurmser, who was Cheney’s advisor on the Middle East since 2003, “the conference in Annapolis might lead to very dangerous consequences, considering the current situation”. He believes the Arab League’s support for the U.S. peace initiative might further undermine the Arab leaders’ political weight in the region. “Arab street might easily interpret the coming of Egyptians, Saudis, and other allies to Annapolis as betrayal of the Islam banner and the Arab nationalism idea, as an attempt to save their regimes from the Iranian regime which acts very efficiently,” said Wurmser.
Nargiz Asadova
All the Article in Russian as of Nov. 29, 2007
|
|
|
