WASHINGTON, 26 June — President Bush all but wrote off Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat yesterday in his long-awaited Mideast speech. Without referring to him by name, he said Arafat is “compromised by terror,” which was exactly what Israel wanted to hear.
“The speech represented a purposeful abandonment of neutrality by the administration, which now has largely adopted the stance of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Arafat is no longer relevant to the peace process,” noted yesterday’s Washington Post, “and that security and political reform must precede negotiations about a Palestinian state.”
Bush’s remarks came after more than a week of intense debate within his inner circle, after a series of especially deadly attacks and a very aggressive Israeli response, and contained a strong expressions of support for Israel.
But Bush did say Israel would also need to take action to ensure progress toward peace: “So I challenge Israel to take concrete steps to support the emergence of a viable, credible Palestinian state. As we make progress toward security, Israel’s forces need to withdraw fully to positions they held prior to September 28, 2000.
“Consistent with the recommendations of the Mitchell Committee, Israeli settlements in the occupied territories must stop.”
Bush said he thought provisional Palestinian state could be set up after about 18 months, with a final political settlement taking around three years.
But he made no reference to an international conference, nor repeat his demand for an immediate withdrawal by Israeli forces.
Last spring, Sharon ignored Bush’s demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Palestinians lands. “He learned on April 4 that to challenge Sharon without coordinating with Sharon can be a painful experience,” said Richard Murphy, a former State Department official responsible for the Middle East.
Powell, in an interview following Bush’s speech, said it was not surprising that first reviews focused “overwhelmingly” on the call for new Palestinian leadership. “It was a major focus of the speech, intentionally.” Powell added that a portion of the speech had been toughened, following the back-to-back bombings against Israeli civilians.
In Washington, Arab diplomats were reserved in their response:
“On a preliminary basis, I think what the president emphasized was that this conflict had to end,” said Nabil Fahmy, the Egyptian ambassador to Washington. “The main point I would draw from the speech – where does Bush want us to go – that’s what I was looking for. It was final settlement. Second is how do we get there…. That’s the part of it we need to really down and analyze carefully.”
“Concerning the Palestinian Authority, that is something that is up to the Palestinians to speak about. They have to make their position known on that issue, which is a domestic internal affair,” said a Middle East ambassador, who spoke off the record.
“What is important for us to understand is how we get from this point to the final solution, which is the creation of the establishment of a Palestinian state. This is the important element.”
He also expressed concern regarding the omission of an international conference. “President Bush did not mention anything about the conference, but we have statements from Secretary Powell that the conference is still on, although the timing needs to be discussed. So, at this point, it is still not clear if it’s totally off, or conditional to the progress made on the ground.”
Arab-Americans expressed thorough disappointment with the president’s speech.
“Although Arab-Americans held out great hope for the president’s Palestinian initiative, today our community is gravely disappointed,” said Jim Zogby, president of the Arab-American Institute.
“…Once more, the president’s plan ignores any responsibility on the part of Israel and asks the Palestinians to create a fully functional democratic state before they earn the right to a provisional state…. The president is allowing the Sharon government to continue its repressive military occupation of Palestinian land.”
“The president has set US foreign policy and US-Arab relations back with today’s announcement. There is nothing here that could give the Palestinians hope, in fact, as we are already seeing, what the president did was allow the Sharon government to continue its repressive military occupation of Palestinian land. The United States has failed this test of leadership in the Middle East,” said Zogby.
The Council of American-Islamic Relations, (CAIR), a prominent national Islamic advocacy group, yesterday said President Bush’s speech outlining his vision for peace in the Middle East puts too much emphasis on Palestinian concessions and too little pressure on Israel to act in accordance with international law. “The speech was a step in the right direction, but it fell short of offering a clear vision of the ultimate destination,” said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad.
“The right to freedom should never be conditioned on the whims of a hostile party and must not face a veto by any individual, group or government opposed to peace. It is up to the Palestinians themselves to choose their leaders in a free and independent political process. That leadership should reflect the hopes and aspirations of all Palestinians,” said Awad.
And finally, the American Muslims for Jerusalem (AMJ), issued the following statement: “American Muslims for Jerusalem expresses disappointment that US Middle East policy has been hijacked by pro-Israel extremist groups within the US and the Israeli government. We, and the nation, looked forward to a constructive statement of vision from our president that would offer hope and a way out of the current morass. Instead, we were given Ariel Sharon’s talking points. The president’s speech would have us believe that Palestinians have been suffering under the Palestinian Authority for decades and not the brutal Israeli occupation and colonial project.”
