Road map merits support

MARK ROSENBLUM

Some well-meaning members of Congress believe that President George Bush's road map to Middle East peace asks too much of Israel. Judging from a letter they recently signed, they don't think it goes far enough in pushing the Palestinians to stop terrorism and corruption. On the other hand, they believe that the Palestinians will be able to accomplish sweeping security, political, and economic changes without parallel Israeli cooperation contained in the plan.

What is apparent from these criticisms is that the representatives in question have failed to stop and read the road map. If they had seriously examined the direction that it lays out for ending Israeli-Palestinian violence, they would have learned that the plan's call for reciprocal steps towards peace works in Israel's best interests.

The congressional letter calls for the end of Palestinian terror and violence, the establishment of a new Palestinian leadership with real authority willing to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, and an overhaul of the Palestinian security apparatus - all before Israel should be expected to do anything in return.

Yet in the first phase of the plan, the road map clearly calls for Palestinians to declare "an unequivocal end to violence and terrorism and undertake visible efforts on the ground to arrest, disrupt and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning violent attacks on Israelis anywhere."

Under the best of circumstances, these security measures would not be easy for the Palestinians to fulfill. But considering that much of the Palestinian security apparatus in the West Bank has been destroyed, and Palestinian society is undergoing a general collapse as the economic strain and violence of the intifada take their toll, the Palestinians will need cooperation from Israel to get the job done.

As the Palestinians carry out their obligations, the road map calls on Israel to agree to stop deportations, attacks on civilians, and the demolition of Palestinian property, gradually return to security cooperation with the Palestinians, and withdraw from the territory it has reoccupied during the intifada. Given the heavy load that Palestinians are rightfully expected to undertake to improve security for Israel, do the representatives who signed the letter objecting to the road map seriously think these obligations are unreasonable for Israel to perform?

As part of the compromise inherent in the peace process, Israel also will be expected to end settlement expansion and take down illegal settlement outposts, and negotiate the terms for the creation of a permanent Palestinian state in the final phase of the road map.

But the plan does not make the creation of a Palestinian state inevitable. At each phase of the road map, the United States and others must reach consensus on whether or not to move ahead. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians will be expected to blindly plow forward with the plan if the other side isn't meeting its responsibilities.

The road map is not a perfect document, but it is far better than supporting policies that are condemning Israel to perpetual conflict and sapping its economic and military strength. Israel would benefit greatly if legislators actually looked at the road map dismissing it out of hand.

Mark Rosenblum is founder and policy director of Americans for Peace Now. Contact him at (202) 728-1893.

Home