US presses Palestinians and Israel to find common ground

Condoleezza Rice is pleading with the Israelis and the Palestinians to work to overcome their differences before an international conference next month, but her statement speaks volumes about the imminent sense of failure that appears to be engulfing her.

"Frankly it is time for the establishment of a Palestinian state," Ms Rice said. "The US sees the establishment of a Palestinian state, a two-state solution, as absolutely essential to the future... We have got quite a long time to go but we are not going to tire until I have given my last ounce of energy and my last moment in office."

Having virtually ignored this crisis to an extent that no previous US administration has ever dared to do, Condi now wants us to know that she and the Bush regime will not tire until her "last moment in office". That's just over a year away and one can't help but feel that Condi and the Bushites turning their attention to this now is simply too little, far too bloody late.

No previous US administration has been so blatantly one sided as the regime of George W Bush and, although he will be remembered as the first US President ever to call for a state of Palestine, he should also be remembered as the one who did less than any other to negotiate peace between the two sides. Indeed, he turned a blind eye when Ariel Sharon was attempting to use Israel's formidable military power to batter the Palestinians into submission and stayed silent throughout Israel's appalling behaviour in Jenin and her aerial bombardment of Beirut.

Now, in the dying days of the Bush administration, they have finally decided they would like to sort out the Israeli-Palestine crisis.

Am I alone in my scepticism here?

It is still far from clear, however, whether the Annapolis conference will go ahead. Arab states have said they do not want to attend if it is just a "photo-opportunity." Officials on all sides have hinted that the event could be postponed or cancelled if a positive outcome could not be assured. Palestinians say failure would undermine Mr Abbas and could trigger a new intifada.

And amid the wrangling, there was a reminder of the gap between rhetoric and reality on the ground with a warning from John Dugard, the UN's special rapporteur on the rights of the Palestinians.

"Every time I visit, the situation seems to have worsened," the retired South African law professor said in a BBC Radio interview. "This time, I was very struck by the sense of hopelessness among the Palestinian people." Mr Dugard attributed this to "the crushing effect of human rights violations", and to Israeli restrictions on Palestinians' freedom of movement.

Israel did face a security threat but "its response is very disproportionate". He said the purpose of some of the hundreds of Israeli checkpoints or barriers in the West Bank was to break it up "into a number of cantons and make the life of Palestinians as miserable as possible".

Mr Dugard suggested the UN should leave the Quartet unless it adopted a more proactive approach to protecting Palestinian rights. The grouping is composed of the UN, US, EU and Russia. The UN "does itself little good by remaining a member of the Quartet". It is "not playing the role of an objective mediator that behoves it".

Mr Dugard's comments echoed a complaint by a former UN envoy, Álvaro de Soto, in a report leaked to the Guardian in June. At the heart of the issue is whether the international community should be boycotting the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, which won free elections in 2006 and took over the Gaza Strip this June, effectively splitting the occupied Palestinian territories in half and vastly complicating already difficult efforts to revive the peace process.

The UN has allowed itself to become complicit in American bias towards the Israelis. For the first time in history we found ourselves in a situation where the international community was applying sanctions to the occupied people rather than to the occupiers.

We are also in the bizarre situation of the UN acting as part of a Quartet which will only deal with Fatah, ignoring Hamas who are the democratic representatives of the Palestinian people.

So any peace talks lack legitimacy, as the people of Palestine did not elect the people who the Quartet are choosing to negotiate with on their behalf.

It really is typical of the way Bush seeks to do business, attempting to stack the decks in favour of the Israelis before any talks even begin; wanting to negotiate with Fatah because he hopes that they will be more compliant than he believes Hamas would ever be.

However, the stink that's coming from these proposed talks before they even begin is one of profound failure. Does anyone seriously believe that an administration that has been the most pro-Israeli in living memory, negotiating with representatives that the Palestinian people did not choose, can come to a fair solution that delivers a state of Palestine? Is there anyone who even believes that this is the intention of these talks?

Israel are currently stealing Palestinian land in the E1 district outside of Jerusalem, land which previous US administration's have insisted is not Israel's, and Rice and Bush have been largely silent. Israeli military intelligence have already been briefing the world that the forthcoming conference is bound to end in failure.

Rice herself is talking about pursuing peace until "my last ounce of energy and my last moment in office." Is it just me, or does promising to pursue something until "my last moment in office" not itself reveal that you already think that you are going to fail?

The US are not serious about peace just as they are not serious about a state of Palestine. Oh, don't get me wrong, they'd like one; just not one that looks anything like the one called for under UN resolution 242 and international law.

Click title for full article.

Tags: Israel, Palestine, Rice, Bush, Annapolis talks, Quartet, United Nations