Magazine article Sojourners Magazine

'The Peace That God Gives': Is There Reason for Hope in the Annapolis Process?

Magazine article Sojourners Magazine

'The Peace That God Gives': Is There Reason for Hope in the Annapolis Process?

Article excerpt

Do you know the definition of a pessimist?'" asks Afif Safieh, head of the PLO delegation to the U.S. He answers with a bitter smile, "An optimist with information." There are grounds for both optimism and pessimism arising from the peace talks restarted at last November's Middle East conference in Annapolis, Maryland, and from President Bush's January visit to Israel and Palestine.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

It must surely be progress that, at Annapolis, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed to meet every two weeks to continue their high-level diplomacy. And in January, during his first visit to Israel and Palestine, Bush surprised just about everyone by insisting, "These negotiations must ensure that Israel has secure, recognized, and defensible borders. And they must ensure that the state of Palestine is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent.... Security for Israel and viability for the Palestinian state are in the mutual interests of both parties." Bush optimistically said he believes the two sides will be able to sign an agreement before he leaves office in January 2009.

However, as long as the U.S. follows a unilateral approach, hinders the work of the United Nations, and funds the Israeli occupation of Palestine, there is little hope of achieving anything. As Middle East scholar Stephen Zunes points out, while both sides have an equal fight to peace and security, "there is a grossly unequal balance of power between the occupied Palestinians and the occupying Israelis."

Zunes continues, "U.N. Security Council Resolutions 446, 452, 465, and 471 explicitly call on Israel to remove its colonists from the occupied territories. However, both the Bush administration and an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress have gone on record that Israel should not be required to withdraw from the majority of these settlements.... Any Palestinian state remaining would effectively be comparable to the notorious Bantustans of South Africa prior to majority rule."

As University of Illinois law professor Francis Boyle put it, Bush's statement "that 'Swiss cheese isn't going to work when it comes to the outline of a state,' sound[s] substantial, but [is] rendered rather meaningless since he only said the U.S. is opposing 'settlement expansion'--meaning that current settlements ... will remain and be annexed by Israel."

Several questions remain unanswered and will determine whether the optimists or the pessimists are proved right. What really constitutes a viable, independent, contiguous, sovereign Palestinian state? …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.