Purpose of the Conference
On Tuesday, Nov. 27, 2007, President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will host a one-day international conference in Annapolis, Md., aimed at creating an independent Palestinian state living peacefully with Israel. For the Bush administration, it’s a belated re-start of the Road Map for Peace, a five-year-old initiative that stalled soon after Bush, the United Nations and the European Union announced it in 2002.
What’s the difference this time? Bush is pushing Israel and the Palestinians to agree, at least in principle, on a final peace treaty—or at least a “final status agreement”—even though fundamental issues such as security, the Palestinian refugees’ right of return, the fate of Jerusalem and Hamas’ control of the Gaza Strip are unresolved. Bush is looking for nothing short of a revolutionary agreement that would end 40 years of Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and 60 years of Arab-Israeli conflicts.
The summit’s aims are as high as expectations are low. A deal between Israelis and Palestinians would be little short of miraculous. All the major negotiators and mediators are politically weak and internally divided, including the Bush administration. Even is a deal is struck in Annapolis, chances are dispiritingly low that it would be carried out without being hijacked by violent and unresolved realities on the ground, for many reasons.
The Players
The many problems undermining the Annapolis conferences’ chance of success begin with the dynamics undermining the various principal delegations attending (and not attending) the conference.
The Americans: As hosts, Bush and Rice are coming to the table with less credibility than any American administration that’s attempted to mediate peace between Israel and its neighbors. Bush’s approval rating is around 30 percent. Arabs mistrust him for his execution of the Iraq war, his unquestioned, undemanding backing of Israel, and his unwillingness, except in few and glitzy bursts, to get involved in the nitty-gritty of Palestinian-Israeli issues. Even after presenting the Road Map in 2002, Bush did not follow up with substantive talks.
The administration is also undercut by an internal rift. Rice believes a long-term solution to Middle East problems begins with a resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Vice President Dick Cheney and Elliot Abrams, the National Security Council’s Middle East policy architect, do not. They consider the Annapolis conference unimportant and unrealistic, preferring to cast their lot exclusively with hard-line Israeli interests.
The Israelis: Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s approval rating is as dismal or lower than Bush’s. Olmert is facing sleaze and corruption charges. His coalition government is shaky. Like the Bush administration, the Israeli delegation is divided. The Israeli defense minister is Ehud Barak, who was prime minister in 2000 when President Clinton mediated at Camp David the last substantial Israeli-Palestinian talks, which failed at the 11th hour. Barak, who wants to be prime minister again, is angling for a more hard-line approach on security, thus limiting Olmert’s ability to make concessions to Palestinians.
The Palestinians: Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has Olmert’s and Bush’s respect, and vice versa, but he’s not much more than a figurehead president for the Palestinians, who are divided geographically and politically. Hamas controls the Gaza Strip and has not been invited to Annapolis. Abbas’ own Fatah organization is split in the West Bank. His prime minister, Salam Fayyad, has no political base.
The Arabs and Iran: Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, agreed only on Nov. 23 to attend the conference. But he won’t shake hands with Israeli representatives. Syria, the last crucial hold-out, accepted the invitation only on Nov. 25 once it was assured that the Syrian Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967 (and annexed in 1981) are also on the agenda. But don’t expect hand-shakes between Syrians and Israelis, either. One plus for the Bush administration: The Arab League agreed to attend.
Iran, however, a key player that bankrolls and arms Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shiite militias in Iraq, was not invited.
The Rest of the World: As the Washington Post reported, “The anticipation surrounding the meeting has heightened the stakes for other countries seeking invites. If Turkey comes, Greece wants a seat. So does Brazil, which has more Arabs than the Palestinian territories. Norway hosted an earlier round of peacemaking in Oslo, so it wants a role. Japan wants to do more than write checks for Palestinians.” In the event, every one of those countries was invited. The total number of countries receiving invitations: 41, including such unlikely candidates as Slovenia, Denmark and Poland.
Next Page: The Issues and the Bottom Line