Rice's Last Visit

Since the Annapolis conference took place nine months ago, Condoleezza Rice has visited the region seven times in the hope of bringing the two sides to an agreement that would represent what Rice hopes would be her “legacy.” However this legacy, in regards to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, will be looked at as one of failure.

It seems that Rice’s most recent visit will be her last as the Secretary of State, and as she goes so will the Annapolis peace process: a process which typified the expression “heavy on process, light on peace.”

If we take a quick look at the Annapolis process, long before the failure of her current visit, we will see that America set its goals clearly from the outset. The two sides wanted to reach a final agreement before President Bush left the White House, to improve the situation on the ground in the West Bank, to improve the situation in the Middle East and create a climate of peace.

There is not really any argument against these goals, but America erred in finding the tools to achieve these three objectives. The overall climate in the Middle East has not improved, the Israeli government has not been able to overcome internal obstacles in order to reach a solution with Mahmoud Abbas, who thirsts for an agreement, and the United States did not succeed in improving the situation on the ground as the settlements continue to expand, and there is still a lack of security for Palestinians.

And more than that, we will see a stark absence of any “heroes” made in the Annapolis peace process. Bush will leave office, Olmert is on his way out, and I don’t know if there will be anything left for Abbas to claim as a “legacy” which will let him hold on to his position. And so he will lose his legitimacy and with it the solution proposed for the upcoming year. Secretary of State Rice will have to hand over these issues to the next administration, and either McCain or Obama will be forced to completely revamp the process if they truly want to invest in peace. They will be left a peace process which didn’t see any significant progress from the last administration.

And what will remain of the two-state solution? The great disaster here is that the land available for it has been steadily decreasing, to the benefit of the settlers. A report issued by Israel’s “Peace Now” movement two weeks ago shows that Israel has actually stepped up its efforts to build settlements in light of the Annapolis conference! This is in clear violation of the commitments made by Olmert as outlined in the American plan proposed at Annapolis. The danger posed by the continued building of settlements in this way threatens the unwritten peace established between the Isrealis and Palestinians, as this peace was founded on the idea of a land sharing plan whereby settlements would be part of the area given to Israel in the the final agreement.

Recently, Israel under Olmert has tried to arrive at a transitional agreement that would postpone decisions on the most important issues, and Abbas has tried to arrive at a final agreement. It is unlikely that either side will agree on anything substantial because the dynamic of what is happening on the ground does not only undermine their efforts but also strips them of any legitimacy.

Interestingly, during her last visit, Rice criticized both sides for failing to implement their commitments. Israel failed to freeze the building of settlements. This is quite true, but she is wrong to accuse the Palestinian side for failing to dismantle the infrastructure of “terrorism.” What terrorism is she talking about when Israel and Hamas have signed a truce? Sometimes political correctness results out of weakness. I’m speaking of Rice’s weakness and inability to employ the weight of her country in stopping Israel’s violations in Jerusalem and in the settlements. It would not be surprising if Rice, in the tradition of Bill Clinton, placed the blame on Palestinians for the failure of the peace process in her memoirs!