Mideast To Condi: Your Time Is Running Out

Watching Condi Rice's lightning visit to Jeusalem and Ramallah--in preparation for crucial Middle East discussions on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly this week-- I wouldn't bet the farm on President Bush's proposed international meeting to discuss an Israeli-Palestinian settlement. Rice went out to get a first-hand reading from Israeli and Palestinian leaders on how their bilateral discussions have been going. Bush's idea is for the gathering to "provide diplomatic support for the parties in their bilateral discussions and negotiations, so that we can move forward on a successful path to a Palestinian state." The signs that I see, alas, are that this U.S. effort, like so many others before, is too half-hearted to go anywhere. Rice may as well start writing her memoirs where she can give her excuses why Israelis and Palestinians proved unable once against to achieve peace during Bush's eight years in office.

After her meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Rice had some diplomatic blah-blahed to say: "We have had wide-ranging discussions...the President [Bush] and I are absolutely devoted...I look forward to our many opportunities to press forward..." For his part, Abbas hit Rice between the eyes with some substantive comments that indicated things are not going too well in his bilaterals with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:

We have asserted to Secretary Rice our serious pursuit to reach a framework agreement to implement solving the issues of the final status, issues which are the borders, the Jerusalem refugees, and the issues of settlement and water. And within this vision we have met periodically with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in our pursuit to reach an agreement that includes a timeframe or a schedule for implementing -- solving final status issues.

We have asserted to Secretary Rice that in order for the peace process to restore its credibility and the trust of the people of the region in it, there is a need for immediate halt of all Israeli settlement activities in Palestinian territories and to stop the construction of the wall of separation and annexation and expansion and to end the siege and the closure imposed on our land and people in all its forms because of its devastating impact on our economy and the standards of living of our people, which has reached its lowest level and constitutes a major source of concern to us and has its repercussions and negative effect on security and stability.

We have asserted also on the utmost importance for stopping the Palestinians of invasions and arrests, the last of which was the invasion of the city of Nablus and its refugee camps. And Israeli threat, the recent Israeli threat to escalate collective punishment, particularly in Gaza.

In this regard, the talk of Israeli politicians and their statements issued following the meeting of the security cabinet yesterday -- that Gaza is a hostile territory -- has serious and grave political connotations. All these measures undermine the efforts exerted from our government for the sake of threatening security and enhancing order in different Palestinian cities.

We have also asserted the importance of our -- the issue of our funds, the prisoners, and the need to release them and end their suffering and imprisonment, as we have been promised more than once.

On a hopeful note, Olmert talked up the idea of a deal with Abbas when he addressed his Kadima Party this week, warning that Abbas was a moderate partner for peace who could be swept away by militants like Hamas if Israel doesn't respond to him. But that's a far cry from giving Abbas the minimum he needs to sell a deal to the Palestinians. His own Defense Minister, ex-PM Ehud Barak, ridiculed the idea of making concessions to Abbas only to please the lameduck American president. In any case, Olmert's allies are quoted saying they would give Abbas less than Barak offered the Palestinians at Camp David in 2000 and was turned down by Arafat.

What all this means is that the Israelis are divided among themselves, the Palestinians are divided among themselves, Olmert is weak, and Abbas is weak, yet Rice expects them to rise to the task of leadership and forge the way forward. Rice says that Bush's April 2003 "Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution isn't dead--forgetting that it was supposed to have solved all the issues by the end of 2005. The New York Times quoted a U.S. official saying at the time, when Colin Powell was still secretary of state: "There have to be some steps by the Palestinians and some reciprocation by the Israelis if we are going to restore trust and dialogue on both sides. We haven't got much time."

Well, time is running out and Bush continues to squander it. It appears that Rice remains far from getting Olmert to agree to Abbas's demand to fully address the final status issues of borders, Jerusalem and refugees. The Saudis and other Arabs are wondering whether they will bother showing up at the meeting if that is the casel; they are upset that Rice continues to call it just a "meeting," when they want a full-blown peace conference. "It's time to sit down and solve the problems, not just to continue talking in another 'meeting'," an Arab diplomat told me. ""We've been talking for decades."

Everybody knows what the outlines of a settlement are: Israelis and Palestinians came very close to a deal back in 2001 when Clinton was still president and before Bush took America out of the mediation business for six years. My hunch: there will be a meeting, it will be postponed until early '08, the Saudis and other players will excuse themselves, Olmert and Abbas will sign a memo stating some progress, and Bush will urge them to... hold some more meetings. I can only conclude by repeating what I blogged in April, when Rice was working hard to get Olmert and Abbas talking again:

Let it be remembered that in 2007, the United States missed what may be a last chance in many years to negotiate a final peace settlement between the Israelis and the Arabs. That failure, if it happens, will keep the Middle East on boil for more years to come, leading to further bloodshed between Israelis and Palestinians, probably between Hizballah and Israel, and possibly between Palestinians themselves.

It is becoming apparent that [Rice's] efforts lack a big vision or a commitment on the part of President Bush, which may amount to a historic abrogation of U.S. responsibility given the significant opportunity offered in the Arab League's occupied-land-for-full-peace initiative of 2002 relaunched at the Riyadh summit last week. American leadership is crucial, yet Bush refuses to take a clear stand on what a fair and just Israeli-Palestnian settlement should look like, and then use America's influence in the region and the world to sell that bold vision to the concerned parties.

--By Scott MacLeod/Cairo