According to US State Department officials, Washington was, before Sept. 11, on the verge of announcing a Middle East diplomatic initiative which would include American backing for the creation of a Palestinian state. If true, it is a cosmic shift in US Middle East policy. Such a move, thought to be the brainchild of Secretary of State Colin Powell who was to have unveiled it, represents a complete U-turn in the Bush administration’s thinking.
During the election campaign, Bush’s foreign policy advisers said that a Republican White House would support the Israelis even if they spurned peace — which is precisely what Ariel Sharon has done. So why the change, especially one that includes US recognition of Palestinian statehood, something that the Clinton administration was not prepared to countenance? And why now?
It could be — and we would like to think that it is the case — that Washington has woken up to the grievous irresponsibility of its hands-off policy, a policy which has allowed Ariel Sharon free rein to destroy almost all hope of a settlement. Certainly, there is every reason to believe reports that Washington is now seriously concerned over the level of violence in the occupied territories. But is that concern purely a response to the events of Sept. 11? Is Washington primarily worried about the effects the violence will have on Arab and Muslim commitment to its international alliance against terrorism? Indeed, going a stage further, is this revelation of a US-planned settlement also specifically a response to the attacks on New York and Washington? Have those terrible events forced the White House to the double realization that it has to play the key role to play in a Palestine-Israel settlement and that Arab and Muslim support for a war against international terrorism will be cool while Palestinians continue to be terrorized by the Israelis? If the answer to these is “yes”, then the world really has changed since Sept. 11.
But is the report true? Or is it a ploy designed to entice Arabs and Muslims into joining the campaign against terrorism? The circumstantial evidence is not helpful. Reports from unattributable sources in the State Department do not tally with what the US actually says and does. Only yesterday, the State Department repeated the tired, old mantra (this time on the record) that the Palestinians have to stop the violence, the implication being they are to blame for it. That suggests that Washington is as biased as ever.
On the other hand, just because it is biased, it does not mean that it has not accepted the necessity of a Palestinian state and that it should play a major role to bring about such a breakthrough. Indeed, whether Washington came to that view before or after Sept. 11 is largely irrelevant. The important point is that, unless it now denies the report, it is seen to have finally espoused the principle of a Palestinian state. There can be no turning back. Having espoused it, why not go ahead with it now?
It is the only way to ensure wholehearted Arab and Muslim support for the war against terrorism. But most important of all, it is a stand for justice.
