Bush sees ongoing terrorism and the need for Palestinian internal reform as the obstacle to resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He overlooks entirely the 35-year military occupation of the Palestinian people. In this, he has adopted Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s position entirely. In so doing, Bush has set aside 35 years of peacemaking efforts based on “land for peace” and replaced them with “reform for peace,” placing virtually the entire burden—at least in the foreseeable future—on the Palestinians, the occupied people.

Bush envisions two states living side-by-side in peace, but sees this as impossible unless all parties fight terror. Clearly this means that the Palestinian leadership must cooperate with Israel even more effectively than has been the case during the past nine years and further suppress its own citizens.

Palestinian Reforms:

The Palestinians—under siege and curfew, and fighting for their future existence as a people—are called upon by Bush to elect new leaders. When the Palestinians have new leaders, new institutions, and new security arrangements, then the United States will support the establishment of a Palestinian state with borders and “certain aspects of its sovereignty” to be resolved in final status negotiations.

Meanwhile the Palestinians are to pursue “reforms” that will require “entirely new political and economic institutions, based on democracy, market economics, and action against terrorism.” Bush completely ignored the fact that since April, Israeli military forces have systematically destroyed the civil society institutions built by Palestinians, with international donor assistance and funding, during the Oslo years.

Bush went further in his acceptance of the Israeli worldview. Arab states, Bush asserted, “will be expected to build closer ties of diplomacy and commerce with Israel, leading to full normalization of relations between Israel and the entire Arab world.” Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah’s initiative, adopted in March by the Arab League in Beirut, offered full diplomatic relations following a peace settlement based on UN resolutions 242 and 338. Bush has, in effect, ordered the Arab world to normalize now. In case anyone missed the point, any country failing to implement Bush’s recipe for peace will be proving itself to be on the wrong side in the war on terror.

Bush’s Speech Lacks Important Ingredients:

Bush’s speech is important for what it fails to do, for what is not there. In order for this speech to lay the groundwork for a breakthrough in peace efforts, it would have had to address several key issues.

First, the Bush plan needed to be anchored in international law. The plight of the Palestinians has, in one way or another, been “outside the law” for 50 years. International law could be applied with reference to other conflicts, other refugee situations, other enforced military occupations, but was set aside for the Palestinians’ circumstances. Adhering to internationally accepted norms of law means that the Palestinian-Israeli borders would be based on the lines of separation held prior to the June 1967 war, including the areas of Arab East Jerusalem. A “partial state” or “provisional borders” simply have no precedent in law. While the President did indicate that the Israeli occupation of areas overrun in 1967 must come to an end, getting to final borders is left to further, future negotiations.

Also absent from Bush’s speech were the major issues involving the future of the 3.9 million registered Palestinian refugees—more than half of all Palestinians—now living in enforced exile, and the final status of Jerusalem.

At negotiations in Taba and since, it has been clear that the Palestinian negotiators have agreed that any resolution of the refugee issue will not alter the demographics of Israel as a Jewish state, and have acknowledged that—at most—a small number of refugees will ever return to Israel proper. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) has long held the view that to resolve the Palestinian refugee crisis, the right of Palestinians to return would be recognized, but implementation would be via a menu of options to be offered to the refugees, which in effect would lead to a few actually returning to Israel. Bush made no mention of the internationally recognized legal rights of the Palestinian refugees, nor did he even acknowledge the creativity of the Palestinian negotiators to date, but relegated the refugee issue to yet another future, final status negotiations round.

The world has long acknowledged that Jerusalem holds a unique position for the three major western religions. Palestinian Authority (PA) Minister of Planning and International Cooperation Nabil Shaath only last week brought to Washington additional Palestinian concessions including an offer to cede sovereignty of the Jewish quarter of the old city—including the Western Wall—to Israel provided that the remaining areas of pre-1967 East Jerusalem remain under Palestinian sovereignty and form the Palestinian capital. This would presumably include most, if not all, of the built-up Jewish settlement areas on the West Bank land “annexed” to Jerusalem by the Israelis since 1967. Bush made no mention of Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state.

Bush’s speech needed to deal directly with the Israeli settlements and here again he deferred. Mentioning settlements only once, Bush stated, “consistent with the recommendations of the Mitchell Commission, Israeli settlement activity in the Occupied Territories must stop.” But this would come after progress towards security and with an Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) withdrawal to positions held prior to 28 September 2000. Just what constitutes “activity” remains unclear and will certainly be interpreted by the Israeli authorities to suit their ongoing plans. The Palestinians have experienced firsthand the Israeli interpretation of Bush’s “must stop” command. There is little reason for the Palestinians to believe now that the land confiscations and settlement building will stop anytime soon.

Finally, aside from a reference to a three-year vision, Bush’s speech contains no firm timetable, no milestones for Palestinian or Israeli reference, and no commitment by the United States to enforce expected actions or to participate in international enforcement of needed actions.

There will be those who try to draw from the speech hopeful signs for the Palestinians and the Arab world. Bush did use the term Palestinian state, he did mention UN resolutions 242 and 338, and he did give a timetable of sorts, suggesting that with enough Palestinian cooperation the whole matter could be resolved in three years. Foggy Bottom is pushing the positive spin to the Arab world. Secretary of State Colin Powell encouraged the glass half-full interpretation in a New York Times interview published hours after the speech. “Toughness is like a windshield wiper,” said Powell. “It can swing from one side to the other. If they [the Palestinians] do what is necessary, then obligations will fall on the other side, and I am quite confident the President will expect all parties—the Palestinians, the Arabs, and the Israelis—to meet their obligations.”

No one expected Bush to adopt requirements for peace accepted by the international community or outlined above, or even accept the recommendations of the Department of State, but his speech suggests his adoption of Sharon’s mindset and his primary concern for domestic political considerations, rather than a thoughtful attempt to resolve the conflict.

The three-year timeframe is telling. The tough negotiations will be put off until after the beginning of Bush’s hoped-for second term, or dumped in the lap of the next president. Unfortunately for the Palestinians, and for Americans too, Sharon does not need three years to destroy the possibility of a viable Palestinian state. Jeff Halper, director of the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions, predicts that in less than a year, Sharon will complete the bypass road grid and concrete fences and bantunstanize the West Bank and Gaza beyond redemption. Palestinian Legislator Hanan Ashrawi recently predicted that Sharon would be able to do it in six months. Under the circumstances, Bush’s speech gives little room for hope.

Heidi Shoup is the executive director of the Palestine Center. The above text may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Palestine Center (Palestine Center). This Information Brief does not necessarily reflect the views of Palestine Center or The Jerusalem Fund. To contact Shoup, write to hshoup@palestinecenter.org.

This information first appeared in Information Brief No. 94, 25 June 2002.