The roadmap resembles the Oslo accords as a staged process and without outside intervention it will suffer the same fate, writes Graham Usher from Jerusalem One week after being published the "roadmap towards peace" is starting to make itself felt within the contortions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, at least on the level of diplomacy. On 4 and 5 May US Envoy William Burns met with Ariel Sharon and new Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (but conspicuously not Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat) to clear the way for a visit later this week of his boss, US Secretary of State Colin Powell. Both prime ministers have expressed a desire to meet as soon as possible, with Sharon reiterating his well-worn mantra that he is ready to make "painful concessions" for peace and Abbas urging Israel to formally adopt the roadmap so that the Palestinians can abandon the "armed Intifada" in favour of peaceful negotiations. It looks and sounds like a new era. It isn't. Since the roadmap was published on 30 April the Israeli army has killed 20 Palestinians (and, perhaps, a British journalist) in the occupied territories, including 13 in a single raid on Gaza City on 1 May. On 5 May an Israeli was killed and two others wounded in an ambush in the West Bank, claimed by Fatah's "unofficial" military wing, the Al-Aqsa Brigades. Nor is there any indication that Israel has accepted the roadmap "as is", as demanded by the Palestinians. In an interview with Israeli Radio commemorating Israel's 55th Independence Day Sharon said an up-front Palestinian renunciation of the refugees' right of return "is something Israel insists on and sees as a condition for continuing the process". It is also a condition no Palestinian leadership, old or new, reformed or otherwise, could countenance. And Abbas knows it. "This is one of their [Israelis'] dreams," he said on 4 May. "We absolutely refuse to waive the right of return as a precondition for Israel's approval of the roadmap." The refugee issue "is for final status negotiations", which, according to the roadmap, are to recommence after the establishment of a "provisional" Palestinian state in 2004, and not before. Sharon also said there will be "another discussion in Washington" over Israel's 15 reservations on the published roadmap before he will submit it to his government. Chief among them is Israel's insistence that the process proceed "sequentially" rather than "in parallel", with the onus on the PA to "dismantle the terrorist organisations" in Palestinian areas ahead of any Israeli actions such as withdrawal from Palestinian cities, settlement freezes or relaxation of the closure. Nor will Israel tolerate a Palestinian cease-fire, he has warned, viewing this as merely a ruse to enable Palestinian militias to rearm and replenish their ranks in readiness for the fights to come. Abbas wants a cease-fire. Although he has vowed to end the "chaos of arms" in Palestinian areas he has long preferred that this be done by consent rather than confrontation. He is keenly aware that the PA now commands neither the power nor the legitimacy to take on the militias by force. "There are two understandings," explained PA Speaker Ahmed Qrei after his meeting with Burns on 5 May. "The Israeli understanding, which calls for a [Palestinian] civil war and a Palestinian understanding based on dialogue and the Palestinian national interest." To reach this higher ground Abbas has dispatched his new Security Minister Mohamed Dahlan, to talk again with the Palestinian opposition, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad. There are also rumours that another round of talks between the Palestinian factions will be held soon in Cairo. The last round, in January, foundered on Abbas and Egypt's proposal that the Palestinians observe a unilateral cease-fire. Few expect the result to be different this time, whatever the sobering impact on the factions of the Iraq war and the new squeeze the US is putting on Syria to end its support for groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. "You cannot tell people to [observe a cease-fire] unless they can see the Israelis are going to reciprocate. And you can't force them to do it unless the Israelis allow us to rebuild our security forces," said PA External Relations Minister Nabil Sha'ath on 6 May. Will the US force this reciprocation? Much depends on Powell's visit. His emissary did urge Israel to take "practical steps to ease the suffering of Palestinians living under occupation, stop settlement activity and renew a sense of dignity and hope". But he warned the Palestinians "there is absolutely no substitute for a decisive fight against terror and violence." As for the right of return "that is a matter between you and them" he told Sharon on 4 May. Such "even-handedness" fits Sharon like a glove, say Palestinians. They believe the Israeli leader's preferred tactic for now will be to stall, aware that any action on issues like a settlement freeze not only conflicts with his own ideology but also with most parts of his government, including his own Likud Party. He also has other reasons to procrastinate. On 4 May Avram Mitzna resigned as the Labour Party leader, barely three months after it suffered its worst ever election defeat. This means Labour will require a temporary leader in the short term and new primaries in the long. The favoured candidate for the first position is former Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres. A main contender for the second will likely be former Defence Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer. Both men seek to steer Labour back into the fold of a national unity government with Likud. In theory, Labour's return would give Sharon the majority he needs to face down the right and make the "painful concessions" for peace. In practice it is far more likely to grant him the time he seeks to bury the roadmap -- the way he so successfully buried the Mitchell Report, Tenet Understandings and Oslo accords on which it is based.
