The Return of the “Roadmap” – A Shift in the Annapolis Process
by Aluf Benn
During her visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority in early March, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke
about activating the trilateral mechanism headed by US General Charles Frasier to monitor the fulfillment of the Roadmap
obligations of both sides. American officials explained that the Administration has not given up hope of reaching
agreement on the core issues in the conflict but that it is logical to focus now on a parallel improvement in the
situation on the ground. If the reality does not change, they argued, any agreement reached would be purely theoretical.
There are probably two reasons for the change in Administration priorities that Rice is trying to bring about. The first
is that there is no sign of any progress on the “core issue” discussions between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA
President Mahmoud Abbas and between Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and the head of the Palestinian negotiating
team, Ahmad Qur’ei. The chances of reaching an agreement by the end of 2008, as proposed at the Annapolis Conference,
now seem remote – and the Bush Administration is seen as responsible for yet another failure in the peace process.
The second reason is that the Administration wants to help PA Prime Minister Salem Fayyad, who is focusing on improving
conditions in the West Bank. In recent months, Fayyad has waged a public relations campaign in the United States that
stresses the need to help Palestinian moderates create economic and educational opportunities in the West Bank. He has
stressed the need to remove roadblocks and other security restrictions imposed by Israel.
However, the first phase of the Roadmap demands actions that imply significant domestic difficulties for both parties.
Israel is required to freeze completely construction in the settlements, to evacuate the outposts set up since March
2001, to refrain from attacking Palestinian civilians, and to reopen Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem. The
Palestinians are required to reorganize the PA’s security forces, to act openly against “individuals and groups”
planning and carrying out terrorist operations against Israelis, and to dismantle terrorist infrastructure and
capabilities. Not surprisingly, both sides have consistently avoided carrying out their obligations since the
publication of the Roadmap five years ago.
This stalemate on the ground has frustrated Rice, and she expressed her feelings upon her return from her Middle East
visit. In a conversation with reporters, she said: “Not nearly enough has been done to show that Israelis and
Palestinians understand or act … It’s clear to me that without the implementation of Roadmap undertakings, without an
improvement on the ground, it will be very difficult to sustain the process.” The American columnist David Ignatius, who
is close to Rice, cited a “senior Administration official” claiming that Israel has not evacuated even one outpost and
has done nothing to relax the roadblocks that cause daily humiliation to the Palestinians. Another complaint was that
the IDF does not rely on PA security forces and prefers to act by itself on the ground. It is noteworthy that the
background conversation with the columnist focused on criticism of Israel, in contrast to the more balanced approach
that Rice took in her public briefings.
In her visit to Israel, Rice asked to convene the Roadmap monitoring mechanism for the first time since Frasier’s
appointment in January. But Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak strongly objected to a trilateral forum and proposed
instead that Frasier convene separate follow-up meetings with the two parties. Rice was not persuaded and Barak
responded by sending the head of the Ministry’s Political-Military bureau, Amos Gilad, rather than coming himself. The
Palestinians were represented by Prime Minister Fayyad, who has ongoing contacts with Barak on current issues.
Olmert has not publicly expressed any disagreement with Rice, but his declarations and actions show that he has
reservations about the shift in the Annapolis process that Rice is trying to promote. He announced that he would persist
in the political process with Abbas despite the escalation in Gaza, thereby emphasizing his focus on “core issues”
rather than on improving day-to-day conditions for Palestinians. Following the attack on the “Merkaz Harav” Yeshiva in
Jerusalem in mid-March, Olmert publicly authorized the construction of 750 housing units in the settlement of Givat Zeev
after working in recent months to stop or at least slow down new building beyond the “Green Line.” In so doing, he
ignored the expected criticism by the PA and the U.S. Administration of his decision, which was taken only a few days
before the monitoring meeting chaired by Frasier.
The chances that roadblocks will be removed and that restrictions on Palestinian movement in the West Bank will be eased
also appear non-existent given the military escalation in Gaza and Israeli concern about a “third intifada” in the West
Bank. Israel is not ready to stop arresting or killing terrorist suspects in Palestinian cities and to rely instead of
the PA security forces. It also objects to their being trained and equipped as a military force.
Rice has severely criticized Israel in the past; in her speech at the Annapolis Conference she compared the roadblocks
in the West Bank to the racial segregation she experience as a child in Alabama, although she balanced her remarks with
criticism of Palestinian terrorism. However, the current differences are being portrayed as a real rift between the
Secretary of State and the Israeli leadership.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to imagine that the administration will opt for a public confrontation with Israel or
claim that Israel rejects peace. President George Bush is due to visit Israel in May for the state’s 60th anniversary
celebrations, and Vice President Dick Cheney, Rice’s rival and leader of the conservative camp in the Administration,
will soon arrive in Jerusalem. Bush will almost certainly refuse to allow differences on outposts and roadblocks to
overshadow demonstrations of friendship for Israel. The Administration will also take into account Olmert’s domestic
political constraints and will make every effort to prevent the collapse of his government. Washington understands the
Prime Minister’s desire to reassure the right-wing following the “Merkaz Harav” attack and therefore contented itself
with watered-down criticism of his decision to renew construction in Givat Zeev. As long as Olmert continues his talks
with Abbas, he will continue to enjoy the backing of the White House.
*****************