The cease-fire announced by Palestinian factions marks a major breakthrough for the government of Abu Mazen, writes Ibrahim Nafie Sunday, 29 June, was an event-packed day for Palestinians and for US envoys to the region, notably National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. One Palestinian faction after the other announced their agreement to a truce, crowning several weeks of intensive efforts on the part of Egyptian and US diplomacy to intervene, respectively, with the Palestinians and Israelis in order to pave the way for the restoration of calm which will allow for the implementation of the roadmap. Hamas and Jihad were the first to declare a halt to military operations against Israel. In a joint statement they announced that this halt would last for three months on the condition Israel halt all forms of aggression against the Palestinian people, "including incursions, destruction, closures, sieges on cities, villages and camps", lift the siege imposed on Arafat, and free Palestinian prisoners. A few hours later the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) issued a statement agreeing to a three- month truce, and immediately afterwards Fatah and the factions under the banner of the PLO Executive Committee announced a truce -- for six months -- on the same conditions as those listed in the Hamas and Jihad statement. Following these statements Israeli forces staged a withdrawal of forces from Beit Lahia and Beit Hanoun and removed all checkpoints from the road linking north and south Gaza, allowing Palestinians to move freely on this road for the first time in two years. It is to be hoped that the initial redeployment and lifting of restrictions marks the beginning of Israel's implementation of the provisions of the roadmap, the first phase of which calls upon Israel to withdraw its forces from all areas occupied since 28 September 2000 and to cease all settlement construction, in keeping with the Mitchell Report. More important at this juncture, perhaps, is Israel's implementation of those provisions of the roadmap that will have an immediate impact on Palestinian morale. The roadmap calls on Israel to take "no actions undermining trust, including deportations, attacks on civilians; confiscation and/or demolition of Palestinian homes and property, as a punitive measure or to facilitate Israeli construction; destruction of Palestinian institutions and infrastructure; and other measures specified in the Tenet work plan." It further calls upon Israel to "take measures to improve the humanitarian situation", and upon Israel and the Palestinians to "implement in full all recommendations of the Bertini report to improve humanitarian conditions, lifting curfews and easing restrictions on movement of persons and goods, and allowing full, safe, and unfettered access of international and humanitarian personnel". At the same time, while the Palestinian factions have done what was needed in order to pave the way for the roadmap some reservations remain pertaining to the form, rather than substance, of their truce declarations. It was expected that the Palestinian factions would present their agreement to halt resistance operations to the PA which, in turn, would have announced this, from Ramallah, within the framework of a single, collective truce declaration, which has obvious ramifications for the prestige of the PA and Palestinian unity of purpose and decision. Instead the resistance organisations issued three separate statements, clearly reflecting the ideological divides between them. However divergent their outlooks, under current circumstances it would have better served the Palestinian cause had the diverse factions demonstrated that there exists large areas of agreement between them with regard to their positions on Israel and on the roadmap. If the various Palestinian forces were unable to reach a collective formula for a truce I believe they can still do so for the struggle to implement the roadmap, during which time it will be of the greatest importance to undermine Sharon's attempts to play on inter-Palestinian contradictions and differences. In all events the declarations, whatever form they took, represent a major breakthrough for the government of Abu Mazen. In his drive to steer the Palestinians towards a settlement process with an ultra-right government in Israel Abu Mazen has struck a balance between the pursuit of the commitments of his government and Palestinian unity. He has withstood pressures and criticisms from all sides, placing his full authority as prime minister behind an unswerving dedication to the cause of his people and his country. He has succeeded in shifting the focus from Israeli demands that he dismantle and disarm the Palestinian resistance organisations to the idea of a truce and, with Egyptian help, succeeded in persuading Washington that a truce could accomplish the desired end: the restoration of calm. The truce also marks an important victory for Egyptian diplomacy. At every step on the way to the roadmap and, even before that, in the efforts to draw Washington's attention to the Palestinian issue a significant Egyptian factor was present. It was Egypt that stepped in to smooth tensions between Abu Mazen and Arafat and to dissuade the prime minister from resigning. It was Egypt that persuaded Tel Aviv to exercise restraint following the suicide bombing in East Jerusalem. And it was Egypt that sponsored talks between the various Palestinian factions and put on the table several possible proposals to enable them to reach an understanding that would pave the way for a truce. But perhaps the most important role Egyptian diplomacy played was towards the US. Egypt has long realised that Washington is the only party capable of pressuring Israel into halting its aggression and instead begin to implement the roadmap. Unlike many other Arab decision-making centres, Cairo feels that the Bush administration, if it summons the necessary resolve, has the power to steer the Middle East conflict towards a solution, and Egypt succeeded in persuading the current US administration of the need to put its energies behind that aspiration, beginning with the crux of the conflict, the Palestinian cause. Recently we saw the fruits of Egyptian diplomatic efforts in the historic summits President Bush held in Sharm El-Sheikh and in Aqaba, in the presence in the region of his envoy Ambassador John Wolf, in Secretary of State Colin Powell's recent visit to the region and in the White House announcement, issued before Powell left, that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice would also be visiting the region. Clearly, recent developments are also a victory for the Bush administration. In spite of the fallout from 11 September and the repercussions of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, this administration has succeeded in evolving a more realistic and forward-looking outlook on the Palestinian cause. This is the first US administration to officially recognise the Palestinians' right to an independent state, and the first administration to promote a clear vision and a practical framework for the realisation of this aim. Moreover, although this administration remains staunchly pro-Israeli, unlike its Clinton-led predecessor, it succeeded in imposing its vision on a very intractable Israeli prime minister. Bush, indeed, proved to be "the kind of man who means what he says": certainly it was this trait, above all, that compelled Sharon to ask his cabinet to approve the roadmap so as to avoid a clash with Washington. US Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice's presence in the region to witness the Palestinian truce declarations and to oversee the first steps of Israel's withdrawal to the positions it occupied before 28 September 2000 is further evidence of Washington's resolve. In her meetings with Sharon Rice was explicit that Israel must implement its obligations under the roadmap. It is also reported that she took issue with Sharon, and members of his cabinet, over Israel's construction of a fence around Palestinian areas in the West Bank. According to Yediot Aharanot she said: "Although Israel claims that the fence does not demarcate a political border, it imposes a reality on the ground and could cause problems in the future." And, in response to their criticisms of the truce, she said: "The truce is not an ideal solution. But that is what we got and we have to give it a chance to succeed." Unfortunately it is necessary here to bring up an unpleasant but important issue. In reporting on Rice's visit some Arab journalists and newspapers flouted all sense of journalistic responsibility and objectivity in writings that bordered on defamation and slander. The clearest example of this phenomenon is to be found in the Palestinian Al-Ayam, which referred to the US security advisor as the "black widow". The very least that can be said of such reporting, which in this case has obvious racist overtones, is that it is highly detrimental to the image of Arabs and their just causes. We only begin to sense its impact in the report that during her debate with Israeli cabinet members Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom thought it opportune to repeat the description. She responded: "Yes, I heard about that. It is truly horrible." We share her feelings. Returning to the subject at hand, now that the Palestinians have fulfilled their responsibilities under the first phase of the roadmap it is up to Israel to reciprocate. It is Israel's turn now to withdraw its forces to their positions before 28 September 2000, to take the necessary measures to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people and to refrain from violating any of the conditions stipulated in the Palestinian truce statements. Certainly, if Israel meets these obligations it will encourage the Palestinians to continue to meet theirs, and there will evolve the mutual confidence needed to ensure that the roadmap arrives at its destination: the creation of an independent Palestinian state by 2005. However, in order to ensure that this process remains on track the US must sustain its close monitoring of developments on the ground and all parties concerned must ensure that the roadmap is implemented to the letter so that all peoples and nations of the region can realise the dream of peace and stability.
