Annapolis: Still Only A Vision Statement

One year ago today, in Annapolis, the Palestinian and Israeli governments agreed to find a solution for peace before the end of George W. Bush’s second term. The announcement was greeted with great celebration.

“All participants are serious about this,” said German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier when the talks concluded. There was, he said, “a real chance” for peace in 2008. But just last Monday, Bush said in a meeting with Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, “I believe the vision of a Palestinian state bordering Israel is still alive.” It’s the only way the Middle East conflict that has lasted for decades can ever be solved and both men are now nearing the end of their terms in office.

The problem is that other than a vision, nothing has been accomplished. The international community has been calling for peace in the region for 15 years. Large sums of public money have been appropriated for both Israel and Palestine, but there is still no peace. And the area available for a future Palestinian state grows ever smaller because Israel persists in constructing settlements. The Palestinian areas have become more and more unstable because of internal armed struggle and further distanced from each other because Fatah controls the West Bank, while Hamas rules in the Gaza Strip.

Segregated streets in the West Bank

In Annapolis, Israel reiterated it has a duty to freeze construction of further settlements in the occupied territories as previously agreed. By August of this year, however, 2210 new residences had been planned compared with 137 for the period January to November 2007. The Israeli settlements and many of the connecting roads are off limits to Palestinians. Palestinian villages are connected, after a fashion, by poorly maintained roads that are easy for the occupying Israeli Forces to control. According to information from the United Nations, the number of permanent Israeli roadblocks in the West Bank, since Annapolis, has risen from 583 to 630.

In the other part of Palestine, the Gaza Strip, because of the international boycott against it’s government, Hamas, about 80 percent of the population is dependent on international food donations. Over one million people have been made beggars. The population does not have continuous electrical power, something that results in to be expected consequences for clincs and food storage.

The catastrophe is internationally well known, especially to the politicians dealing with it. In spite of that, the situation grows steadily worse despite, or perhaps because of, international aid. Evidence for a more intelligent use of public monies, however, is not yet apparent.

Self-determination is the only hope

According to the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, the Israeli army calculates that a re-occupation of the Gaza Strip would cost Israel about 3.4 million Euros a day (currently about $4.4 million). That’s not the military cost, but what Israel would have to spend to provide basic supplies mandated by international law for populations under military occupation. These costs would be borne mainly by European Union taxpayers despite the fact that Israel controls access, by air and sea, to the area. That is also considered occupation.

It costs international donors even more in the West Bank: beside Palestinian government salaries, they also pay education, healthcare and other costs despite the fact that the Israeli military has the area under direct military occupation.

Palestinian development is only marginally under Palestinian control. There is, for example, far too little water available for the population. Water from the tap was last available in towns south of Hebron in May. Groundwater is available and the Palestinians would gladly drill wells but they cannot get permission to do so from Israel. And the international donors let it go.

Contracts worth millions flow freely for pipes and sewage systems, but not for new well drilling. In Germany, such projects are generously portrayed as helping to supply clean drinking water. Clean it is, but not enough by a long shot.

A Palestinian state would be a guarantee of peace in the region, but it can only come into being with international assistance. Anyone wishing to help, however, needs to take a hard look at what has happened up until now. Sovereign governmental institutions cannot be erected in an area still under military occupation. Not until the Palestinians are able, without pressure, to determine their own future can there be hope for any improvement there.