Unity must be the watchword if the Palestinians are not to fall into the traps Israel is laying, writes Ibrahim Nafie I had planned this week to continue my series on Iraq; however the assassination attempt against Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and the resignation of Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) compel me to turn my attention to the increasingly floundering roadmap. The only possible vantage point for understanding recent developments in the occupied territories resides in the attitudes of the current Israeli government. The government of Ariel Sharon clearly has no desire to reach a settlement and, consequently, to see the restoration of calm that would compel it to fulfil its obligations under the roadmap. The prospect of an independent Palestinian state, the creation of which is the ultimate objective of the roadmap, places the Israeli right in a severe ideological and political dilemma. It is little wonder, therefore, that the government that represents this current of opinion is desperate to wriggle its way out of the current process, and its key to so doing is to sustain and escalate tensions in the occupied territories and provoke the Palestinian resistance movements into retaliatory responses so that it can affix the blame for the failure of peace efforts on the Palestinians. I would even suggest that the Sharon government had a ready-made plan to abort the roadmap. Certainly, the way it has dodged implementing any of its provisions, combined with its sustained aggression against the Palestinian people confirm the assessment President Mubarak made shortly after Sharon became prime minister in February 2001. Sharon, he said, has no vision for a political settlement. All he has are plans for military escalation and destruction. Under the first phase of the roadmap, Israel was to withdraw its forces to the positions they had occupied before the outbreak of the Al-Aqsa Intifada on 28 September 2000. It was to halt all settlement construction, including the expansion of existing settlements on the pretext of accommodating "natural growth". Restoration of calm also meant that Israel would have to unblock funds destined for the PA and release the thousands of Palestinian prisoners in its prisons and detention camps. The roadmap further called upon Israel to take immediate measures to alleviate the suffering and daily degradation of the Palestinian people. Not only has Israel failed to take significant steps in this direction, it has relentlessly compounded their suffering. A recent Amnesty International report on the situation in Palestinian territories noted that "increasing restrictions and new measures adopted to tighten and enforce closures (the prohibition of movement within and/or between areas) and curfews have all but destroyed the Palestinian economy." The report holds Israel directly responsible for increasing rates of unemployment, poverty, malnourishment and other health problems among Palestinians in the occupied territories. The most tangible manifestation of the attrition Israel is wreaking on the rights and welfare of the Palestinian people is the enormous separating wall it is building inside the West Bank. The Amnesty report observes: "The barrier has very serious economic and social consequences for over 200,000 Palestinians in nearby towns and villages... In addition, the barrier cuts off several Palestinian villages and large areas of Palestinian agricultural land from the rest of the West Bank, and separates other Palestinian villages and towns from the land of their inhabitants." Israel claims that the project is to prevent suicide bombings and other attacks inside Israel. However, as Donatella Rovera, head of the team that prepared the report, said: "If they had constructed the barrier along the pre-June 1967 borders we would have nothing to say. However, it is being built inside occupied Palestinian territories and isolating Palestinian communities from one another." The creation of a Palestinian state conflicts with the beliefs of the fundamentalist Israeli right, which reduces the Palestinian "problem" to the existence of an "alien" people on part of what they term "Greater Israel". However, the Sharon government has more than ideological reasons for decimating the roadmap. Implementing the provisions of this plan would lead to the dissolution of the current ruling coalition, which is propped up by an assortment of ultra- conservative parties that share Likud's refusal to halt settlement construction on Palestinian territories. Several of Sharon's coalition partners, alongside members of Likud, have threatened to withdraw from the coalition if the government calls a halt to settlement construction. For pragmatic reasons to do with perpetuation in power Sharon has sought to "export" his domestic tensions to the Palestinian side. Towards this end he pressed for a number of preconditions before fulfilling Israeli obligations, foremost among them the demand that the PA disarm and dismantle the Palestinian resistance organisations. The demand was made in the full awareness that the PA could not meet it. Abu Mazen could not dismantle bodies exercising the internationally sanctioned right to resist foreign occupation. In addition, the attempt to disarm these organisations would have precipitated a Palestinian civil war in which the majority of Palestinians would have sided with the groups they feel are their strongest bulwark against Israeli occupation forces. Through Egyptian mediating efforts Abu Mazen succeeded in reaching an agreement with the Palestinian factions over the notion of a "truce", in accordance with which the factions would cease all acts of resistance for a period of three months in order to give the roadmap a chance. The former Palestinian prime minister further succeeded in persuading Washington to accept the principle of a truce, which then went into effect on 28 June. To the Sharon government calm is the number one enemy. It was presented with a dilemma. Its immediate answer was to unleash a vicious campaign against the Palestinian prime minister, charging that he was unfit to perform his job because he was under the thumb of Arafat whom Israel, with Washington's backing, has long been attempting to sideline. Simultaneously Israel lashed out against Egypt, the major supporter of the Palestinian position, accusing it of abetting the smuggling of arms to the Palestinians through tunnels between the Sinai and Gaza. With prodding from the Israeli government Zionist forces in the US initiated a petition in the Senate demanding Egypt cease contacts with President Arafat and terminate both its efforts to clear the air between him and Abu Mazen and its drive to promote a truce. Israel's second answer to the truce was to reinvoke its assassination policy against Palestinian resistance leaders. The assassination attempt against Abdul-Aziz Al-Rantissi represented the opening shot in this campaign. Although Hamas responded with a suicide bombing in Jerusalem targeting Israeli civilians in order to remind Israel that it was still capable of retaliating, the Sharon government refused to heed the message. Shortly thereafter Israeli forces gunned down Ismail Abu Shanab, a prominent representative of the moderate faction in Hamas, followed by assassination attempts against Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Ismail Haniya. For the Palestinians and Arabs the truce was part of an inherently reciprocal political process intended to facilitate the implementation of the roadmap; for Sharon it was a one-way street. The job of the PA, in his view, is to assist Tel Aviv in ensuring the security of Israel and the Israeli people, with no regard to the root causes of the conflict. It is little wonder, therefore, that Abu Mazen increasingly felt his position untenable. To compound his frustrations Washington made no efforts worth mentioning to pressure Israel into meeting its obligations under the roadmap or to stop its deliberate provocations. Inevitably Abu Mazen began to feel that the US had abandoned him. Matters reached a head when he and Arafat came to odds over control of the PA security apparatus. Naturally Arafat, the legitimately elected president of his people, could not relinquish control over Palestinian security, the purpose of which is to preserve order in PA territories not to protect the security of Israel. We had hoped that Abu Mazen would have continued to pursue a reasonable course. Instead he decided to appeal to the PA Legislative Council, setting a number of conditions that would have to be met if he were to remain in power. This decision, I believe, was ill-judged. Had he succeeded a dangerous rift would have opened in the PA leadership which, in turn, would have triggered further fragmentation. The only beneficiary would have been Sharon. Abu Mazen's resignation and the taste of acrimony it left came at a most delicate time for the Palestinian cause. All the wiser, then, was Arafat's choice of Speaker of the PA Legislature Ahmed Qureih to lead the Palestinian government in the coming phase. Qureih is known for his ability to withstand pressures and for the tenaciousness with which he defends his points of view. In addition he and Arafat have a strong meeting of minds over the fundamental issues pertaining to the rights of the Palestinian people. Still, Qureih will face many formidable challenges: unremitting Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people; Sharon's campaign to harm Arafat and Washington's extreme pro-Israeli bias, epitomised most recently in the decision to suspend the roadmap, which dovetailed perfectly with Sharon's designs. Egypt is fully aware of the dangerous situation in the Palestinian territories. It realises that the most pressing task before the Palestinians at this juncture is to restore unity of rank, and for the PA and Palestinian factions to reach a consensus. It is for this reason that Cairo this week invited some of the most prominent leaders of Hamas, foremost among whom was political leader Khaled Mashaal, for talks on possible ways to solve the current predicament. One idea being discussed with Hamas leaders is the possibility of transforming the movement into a political party. The proposal was aired in response to a statement by EU foreign affairs and security chief Javier Solana during his recent visit to Cairo that the EU would be prepared to recognise Hamas if it became a political party. The way ahead for the Palestinians will be extremely arduous. Sharon is determined to fuel tensions between the Palestinians in the hope of triggering an internecine war. This prospect, alone, should compel the Palestinian factions to rise to the level of the challenge. They must summon the greatest possible political acumen and collective resolve not to fall into the trap that Sharon is setting for them, with Washington's connivance.
