Bush's letter of assurance to Jordan's King Abdullah and obvious change in US policy towards the Palestinian Authority were seen as part of a damage limitation effort following the Iraqi torture pictures scandal, Khaled Dawoud reports from Washington Following a reported debate within the US administration, President George W Bush handed Jordan's King Abdullah a week ago a letter of assurance that fell short of Jordanian demands but remained satisfactory on the bilateral level. He also announced that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice will hold a meeting on 17 May with Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei in Germany and that he would also be given a letter explaining US intentions regarding the settlement of the conflict with Israel. The letter handed to King Abdullah, which was released by the Jordanian Embassy in Washington and not the White House in a clear attempt to keep it low- key, stressed US commitments to developing bilateral relations between the two countries, praised Jordan's effort for political and economic reform and offered a pledge to "oppose any developments in the region that might endanger your interests". Without going into specifics on what these developments could be, Bush was clearly referring to the situation in Iraq and Palestine. Jordan has always voiced concern that Israel's refusal to reach settlement with the Palestinians threatened its own security, especially as its population is made up of nearly 60 per cent Palestinians. A total breakdown in the situation in Iraq would also endanger Jordan as one of its closest neighbours. According to one administration official, King Abdullah came to Washington with a clear understanding that he would receive the letter, reflecting Arab worry and dissatisfaction with a similar letter President Bush handed to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on 14 April. In that letter, Bush endorsed, for the first time in the history of US involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict, Sharon's request to deny Palestinians refugees their right of return to their homeland in what is now Israel, and backed its demand to annex parts of the West Bank that include densely populated Jewish settlements. That was in return for Sharon's implementation of a plan he announced to evacuate all settlements in Gaza and four small settlements in the West Bank. Although the Israeli pull out from Gaza will not return sovereign authority to Palestinians, Israel continuing to control land and sea borders, and was not in accordance with the roadmap which President Bush personally endorsed last year, the US administration said the Gaza plan could be a good first step in reviving stalled peace talks. Following Bush's letter to the Israeli premier, Abdullah announced he was postponing a scheduled meeting with the US president on 21 April, and that a new date would be set after removing misunderstanding between the two countries over the new US stance. According to US officials, Abdullah wanted the US letter addressing his government to declare US support for compensating Palestinian refugees for the land they lost after Israel's creation in 1948. But in their joint news conference, and in the circumspect letter to Abdullah, Bush did not refer to that issue, reiterating instead that the United States will not prejudge final status issues, preferring to leave the detail to direct negotiations between the two parties. Whether this assurance, seemingly prepared by Washington in a bid to calm Arab anger after news broke of the letter to Sharon, will do anything to restore American credibility as an honest broker in the conflict remains to be seen. "I remain committed as ever to my 24 June 2002 vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, and to the establishment of a Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent," Bush stated in his appearance with Abdullah at the White House, and in the letter he handed to him. However, Bush also confirmed his commitment to support Sharon's plan on unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, an issue which is now in doubt after the premier's Likud Party rejected his proposals in a referendum held in early May. US officials conceded that the referendum outcome left them in disarray, unable to determine what the next step would be. Due to this confusion, US officials welcomed a decision by Sharon to postpone a scheduled visit to the United States next week in which he planned to address the largest pro-Israel lobby group in Washington, the American Israeli Action Committee (AIPAC), and meet Bush. One Washington-based Israeli diplomat told Al-Ahram Weekly that Sharon preferred not to come to Washington "because he wanted to reflect on what to do next with the Gaza plan". The diplomat added that US officials remained hopeful that Sharon could come up with a new formula that would allow for the implementation of the plan. One possibility the Bush administration is enthusiastic for is the collapse of the current Likud-led government and the formation of a new coalition cabinet that would endorse the Gaza plan. In statements last week, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that, "the Likud Party didn't vote for [the plan]. But when we look at the Israeli public, there's an 80 per cent approval rating for this kind of initiative." He added, "and to the extent that the president's embrace of this initiative helped generate that kind of support within the Israeli public, that's useful. And I think Prime Minister Sharon will be able to use the president's embracing of the plan, and this public support, to ultimately prevail in getting the plan approved and we can move forward." An Israeli diplomat who spoke to the Weekly on condition of anonymity said his government was not worried by the letter handed to Abdullah, or the one Bush planned to send to the Palestinian premier, Abu Alaa, ahead of his meeting with Rice in Germany. "We can't understand why the Jordanians wanted that letter, but if they were happy with it, that's fine with us," the diplomat said, while adding that the US administration also informed them of the content of the letter soon to be received by Abu Alaa. An informed US source told the Weekly that Saudi Arabia has also requested, and received, a letter of assurance from President Bush, but that its content was not revealed to the public. "Most Arab countries have been worried by the letter President Bush handed to Sharon, and our future strategy in the region. If these letters would help in calming the fears of our close Arab allies, we don't mind offering them," the source said. Meanwhile, most US analysts agreed that Bush's announcement of the meeting between Rice and Abu Alaa, who has been shunned by Washington since taking office for allegedly failing to stand up to Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, was nothing more than lip-service in face of mounting anger against the United States after the scandal involving US soldiers torturing Iraqi prisoners. The White House has been trying to repair the damage photos from Abu Ghraib have done, and announcing a meeting with the Palestinian prime minister after months of disregarding him could be one way to do that, analysts believe. But at the same time Bush announced his commitment to the roadmap in the letter he handed to Abdullah, and in several other public statements, he threw a bombshell when he announced in an interview with Al-Ahram Editor-in-Chief Ibrahim Nafie last week that no Palestinian state would be announced in 2005, as the roadmap calls for. "Well, 2005 may be hard, since 2005 is right around the corner. I readily concede the date has slipped some, primarily because violence sprung up," he told Al- Ahram. He added, "I don't want to make any excuses, but nevertheless, I think the timetable of 2005 isn't as realistic as it was two years ago. Nevertheless, I do think we ought to push hard as fast as possible to get a state in place." Bush also avoided providing an answer to a direct question by Al-Ahram on why he gave up proposals made in earlier final status talks held between Israel and Palestinians promising Palestinians the right of return for a limited number of refugees, and a land swap for any territory Israel might seize in the West Bank. "I think some people are trying to read something into what I said or didn't say. And what -- you know, I'll say it one more time: This [Sharon's plan] is an opportunity that we can't let go by. There's a lot of argument about final status issues, and they're very important issues, don't get me wrong. But the focus ought to be on how do we get a Palestinian state up and running and moving forward." With less than six months ahead of upcoming US elections in which Bush is seeking a second term, nothing major should be expected to take place on the peace process front, most analysts believe. All that can be expected are official statements reaffirming commitments to find a solution to the conflict, in order not to be accused by opponents of disregarding a volatile regional situation.
