With ‘Road Map’ Set, Battle Shifts To Its Implementation

By Marc Perelman, With Reporting by Ori Nir in Washington and the Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Published April 11, 2003, issue of April 11, 2003.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Having apparently failed to secure any changes to the internationally sponsored “road map” to peace, Israel and its supporters in Washington are gearing up for diplomatic battles over the plan’s implementation.

The Israeli government said this week that it would submit 15 proposed amendments to the document, which is expected to be released within weeks, after the formation of a new Palestinian government. Diplomats and observers told the Forward that Jerusalem is not expecting to succeed in changing the text of the current draft, however. Israeli officials simply are jockeying for diplomatic position in the upcoming battles over how the plan is interpreted and implemented.

In particular, observers said, Israel and its allies are working to deny the United Nations, European Union and Russia — which along with the United States comprise the Madrid Quartet that drafted the road map — any significant role in evaluating the plan’s implementation.

“The Israelis know the road map document will be out and they are already positioning themselves on the crucial next steps,” said a Western diplomat involved in the talks. “The number one issue — and a very sensitive one — is the monitoring mechanism of the road map.”

According to diplomats, quartet members reached an understanding that the monitoring should be done by the international parties backing the plan, rather than by the Israelis and the Palestinians. The goal, observers said, is to avoid a repeat of the failed implementation of the earlier Mitchell plan.

Under the plan proposed by former senator George Mitchell in May 2001, the United States essentially allowed Israel to judge the question of Palestinian compliance and to put conditions on the implementation of the earlier plan, eventually dooming it.

“The E.U., the U.N. and Russia _ ‘the trio’ — made it clear that it wanted the monitoring out of Israeli hands to avoid a Mitchell redux — and the Americans agreed in principle that an international entity should judge,” one European diplomat said.

But in a bow to Israel’s worries about the intentions of the U.N., E.U and Russia, the quartet agreed on the need to have an American-led monitoring mechanism.

“The quartet will judge compliance through an American-led mechanism,” said Javier Sancho, a spokesman for Miguel Moratinos, the E.U. envoy to the Middle East, a point confirmed by several Western diplomats. “We are fully aware that this is very sensitive for Israel.”

Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said Sunday that Israel wants the United States, and not the quartet, to verify the implementation of the agreement. However, a Western diplomat involved in the discussions said that the Israeli government is signalling its willingness to “accept the idea of an international, American-led structure.”

Stephen P. Cohen, a consultant with the pro-Oslo Israeli Policy Forum, said that such a model would allow Israel to see the process as an American-led one, while the Palestinians and the international community could see it as a quartet effort.

During the last month, a draft document outlining the monitoring mechanism has been circulating among quartet members. Diplomats said that the Bush administration was set to propose a finalized version following interagency consultations between the State Department and the National Security Council.

But an American official said he was not aware of such discussions.

One Western diplomat at the U.N., reading from a draft document, described to the Forward the main outlines of the mechanism. Another diplomat privy to the discussions confirmed this account.

The current plan calls for the formation of a Jerusalem-based monitoring committee to be headed by an American who would report to the quartet. It is still unclear how it would make decisions, but consensus is the preferred option, the diplomat said. The proposed monitoring committee would oversee four subcommittees dealing respectively with security, reform, humanitarian issues and miscellaneous issues, possibly including settlements and incitement. Each subcommittee would be headed by a quartet member — with the United States at the helm of the security committee.

One Western diplomat said that the Bush administration was supposed to submit a selection of names for the American head of the monitoring team, and would like to announce the nominee at the same time that the monitoring plan is unveiled.

“We will need a diplomat who is a project manager,” the diplomat said. “But he should be someone welcomed by Israel.”

A senior official at a Jewish organization expressed confidence that the United States will have the dominating role and stave off the other members of the quartet. Meanwhile, pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington said that they have recently received indications from American officials that the administration will be responsive to Israeli concerns about the road map.

While quartet members were able to find common ground on the road map document and the monitoring mechanism, cracks are likely to appear in the future. For instance, while the U.N., E.U. and Russia see the road map as a series of parallel steps to be taken by Israel and the Palestinians, Jerusalem wants a sequenced approach, first requiring Palestinian action against violence. The Bush administration has not taken a clear stance on the issue.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee sent nearly 3,000 people to Capitol Hill last week, each asking congressmen to sign letters to President Bush asking him to reject calls for a road map that demands Israeli concessions up front.

At the same time, the Israel Policy Forum and Americans for Peace Now were faxing legislators’ offices and holding background briefings, calling the current road map the best available policy and urging lawmakers not to place conditions on progress toward peace.

The current draft of the road map talks of “parallel steps unless indicated otherwise” and at some point of “reciprocal steps.” This should provide the administration with some diplomatic wiggle room, but is also likely to fuel disputes among quartet members.

“There is a loophole there and we know this will be the key issue,” a Western diplomat said.

For instance, the road map states that following a comprehensive cease fire Israel should “immediately” dismantle settlement outposts erected since March 2001 and freeze all settlement activity, including construction for natural growth. But Sharon told the Israeli cabinet Sunday that there was absolutely no reason to discuss the settlement issue right now.

The United States has been at odds with the other quartet members since the current version of the road map was drafted in December. The other three partners initially pushed for the immediate release of the document, but the Bush administration kept delaying, insisting first on the need to wait for the result of the Israeli elections and then the beginning of Palestinian political reform.

The debate over when to release the plan did not prevent negotiations over the monitoring mechanism. After the E.U. submitted a first draft, the U.N. and the United States also presented drafts. During the last month the parties have put the finishing touches on a final document outlining the monitoring mechanism, and are awaiting for the administration to weigh in on several issues.

The parties are still discussing how to release the actual road map.

The general idea is to have a public declaration by the quartet, followed by the handing of the document to the parties by quartet envoys. However, diplomats said, Israel wants to receive the document from the United States, and not the quartet. In the case of the Palestinians, the tricky issue is how to deal with the new dual leadership structure. The current thinking is to hand the document to newly appointed prime minister Abu Mazen and a copy to Yasser Arafat.






Find us on Facebook!
  • "My dear Penelope, when you accuse Israel of committing 'genocide,' do you actually know what you are talking about?"
  • What's for #Shabbat dinner? Try Molly Yeh's coconut quinoa with dates and nuts. Recipe here:
  • Can animals suffer from PTSD?
  • Is anti-Zionism the new anti-Semitism?
  • "I thought I was the only Jew on a Harley Davidson, but I was wrong." — Gil Paul, member of the Hillel's Angels. http://jd.fo/g4cjH
  • “This is a dangerous region, even for people who don’t live there and say, merely express the mildest of concern about the humanitarian tragedy of civilians who have nothing to do with the warring factions, only to catch a rash of *** (bleeped) from everyone who went to your bar mitzvah! Statute of limitations! Look, a $50 savings bond does not buy you a lifetime of criticism.”
  • That sound you hear? That's your childhood going up in smoke.
  • "My husband has been offered a terrific new job in a decent-sized Midwestern city. This is mostly great, except for the fact that we will have to leave our beloved NYC, where one can feel Jewish without trying very hard. He is half-Jewish and was raised with a fair amount of Judaism and respect for our tradition though ultimately he doesn’t feel Jewish in that Larry David sort of way like I do. So, he thinks I am nuts for hesitating to move to this new essentially Jew-less city. Oh, did I mention I am pregnant? Seesaw, this concern of mine is real, right? There is something to being surrounded by Jews, no? What should we do?"
  • "Orwell described the cliches of politics as 'packets of aspirin ready at the elbow.' Israel's 'right to defense' is a harder narcotic."
  • From Gene Simmons to Pink — Meet the Jews who rock:
  • The images, which have since been deleted, were captioned: “Israel is the last frontier of the free world."
  • As J Street backs Israel's operation in Gaza, does it risk losing grassroots support?
  • What Thomas Aquinas might say about #Hamas' tunnels:
  • The Jewish bachelorette has spoken.
  • "When it comes to Brenda Turtle, I ask you: What do you expect of a woman repressed all her life who suddenly finds herself free to explore? We can sit and pass judgment, especially when many of us just simply “got over” own sexual repression. But we are obliged to at least acknowledge that this problem is very, very real, and that complete gender segregation breeds sexual repression and unhealthy attitudes toward female sexuality."
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.