|
Recent
Stories
April
3, 2003
Uri
Avnery
A Crooked Mirror: Presstitution and
the Theater of Operations
David
Vest
Can You Hear the Silence?
Anthony
Gancarski
Colin Powell Telemarketer
David
Lindorff
Takoma: the Dolphin Who Refused
to Fight
Michael
Roberts
War, Debts and Deficits
Ramzy
Baroud
Now That Iraqis Are Being Killed Is Israel Any More Secure?
Jo Wilding
From Baghdad with Tears
Anton
Antonowicz
Cluster Bombs on Babylon
Alison
Weir
Israel, We Won't Forget Rachel Corrie
Bruce
Jackson
Hating Wolf Blitzer's Voice
Eliot Katz
War's First Week
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 04/03
April
2, 2003
Alexander
Cockburn
The Politics of Casualties
David
Lindorff
Making America Safer...for Iraqi
Fighters
William
Blum
Some Observations on the Recent Behavior of the Empire
Gustavio
Sierra
The Morning After the Slaughter at
Nasser
Patrick
Cockburn
Playing Into Saddam's Hands
Robert
Jensen
Peter Arnett: Whipping Boy of the
Pentagon
Jeremy
Brecher
Uniting for Peace Update
N.D.
Jayaprakash
The Siege of Basra
LaDawn
Haglund
You Can Jail the Resisters, But You
Can't Arrest the Resistance
Robert
Fisk
Truth and Subterfuge
Jemima
Khan
I'm Ashamed to be British
Steve
Perry
War Web Log
Stew Albert
Total War
Website
of the Day
Traitor List: Sign Up Now!
April
1, 2003
Jason
Leopold
Rumsfeld: "Get Me Rewrite"
William
S. Lind
The Pitfalls of War Planning
Jorge
Mariscal
Latinos on the Frontlines, Again
Paul
de Rooij
Arrogant Propaganda
Jo
Wilding
From Baghdad: "I Am His Mother"
Tarif
Abboushi
Operation Embedded Folly
Lee
Sustar
Labor's War at Home
Akiva Eldar
Israeli Dreams of Iraqi Oil
Bernard
Weiner
The Vietnam Connection
Robert
Fisk
The Graveyard at Baghdad's North
Gate
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 04/01
Website
of the Day
A Collectible War
March
31, 2003
David
Lindorff
Liberating Iraqis from Their Homes
Neve Gordon
A Different Kind of Despair
John
Chuckman
Absurdities and Contradictions
Ron Jacobs
Bernie Sanders Voting Maybe on
War
Wayne
Madsen
The Siege of Washington
Mark Franchetti
Slaughter at the Bridge of Death
Robert
Fisk
Blood and Bandages of the Innocent
Robin Cook
Send Our Soldiers Home
Anthony
Gancarski
Investigate Perle
Uri Avnery
The Devil's Dictionary
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 03/31
March
29, 2003
Kathy and
Bill Christison
"Like Being Autistic with
Power": an Interview with Jeff Halper
Ben
Tripp
"My Empire for a Map!": Geography
American Style
Ann Harrison
The War on Protesters: San Francisco's
Berserk Cops
Kurt
Nimmo
Dead People: Don't Go There
Chris Floyd
Blood on the Tracks: Cheney the
War Profiteer
Ann
Pettifer
Israelis: Victims No Longer?
Jo Wilding
Dispatch from Baghdad: Nowhere
is Safe
Ramzy
Baroud
Horror Chamber: Inside the Al-Amiriya
Shelter
David Krieger
Perle is Gone, But the Looting
Continues
John
Gershman
Dreams of Empire; Eulogies for International
Law
Robert
Fisk
Bombing the Phone System
Brice Abel
War, Bush and the Jesus Torilla
Tom
Stephens
The Chickenhawk Circle of Hell
Alexander
Cockburn
"War Not Going According
to Plan"
March 28,
2003
Robert
Fisk
Bitter Truths About Basra
Daniel
Wolff
A Road Trip in Wartime
Chris
Clarke
We Never Spit on Any Baby Killers
David Lindorff
Saddam, a Hero Made in Washington
Pierre
Tristam
Icarus on Crack: American Hubris
and Iraq
Jason Leopold
Richard Perle: the Enterprising
Hawk
Saul
Landau
Technological Massacre
Carol Norris
The Mother of All Bombs
Riad
Abdelkarim, MD
Iraq War Lingo 101
Adam Engel
Schlock and Awe
Steve
Perry
War Web Log
March 27,
2003
Anthony
Gancarski
Somebody Blew Up Baghdad
Rahul
Mahajan
The New Humanitarianism: Basra as
Military Target
Simon Jones
A Letter from Uzbekistan
William
S. Lind
No Exit
Diane Christian
A Day of Reckoning
The
Black Commentator
Onward
Embedded Soldiers: the Press and the War
Mickey
Z.
Remembering the Real Moynihan:
Genocide in East Timor
Richard
Thieme
The Problem of Empathy
Jason Leopold
Energy Scams: Bilking California
Out of Billions
Tariq
Ali
A Naked Display of Imperial Power
Alexander
Cockburn
Up the Creek
March 26,
2003
Bruce Jackson
A Battlefield from Hell
Pablo
Mukherjee
Watch
Their Lips
David Krieger
Shock But Not Awe
Linda
Heard
Winning
Hearts and Minds Bush-Style
Imad Jadaa
The Beautiful Face of America
Adam
Engel
Buckets
of Blood
Patrick
Cockburn
Kurds Unimpressed
David
Lindorff
POWs,
Torture and Hypocrisy
Robert
Fisk
The Coup That Didn't Happen
April
Hurley, MD
A
Doctor's Outrage in Baghdad
Gloria
Bergen
Chretien's Shame
Reema
Abu Hamdieh
The
Smell of Death Surrounds Me
March 25,
2003
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Life During Wartime
Gary
Leupp
What
Democracy Looks Like: the Streets of Cairo
Bill and
Kathleen Christison
An Interview with Hanan Ashrawi
Bruce
Jackson
Why
Protest? Why Write?
Uri Avnery
Bitter Rice: Thoughts and Warnings
on the War
Jason
Leopold
Blood
Indicator: Casualties and the Stock Market
Ralph Nader
A Pre-emptive War on a Defenseless
Country
March 24,
2003
Alexander
Cockburn
Ominous Signs
David
Lindorff
Peacekeepers
at Ground Zero
Diane Christian
Blood Sacrifice
Kathy
Kelly
The
Morning After Shock and Awe
John Stanton
US Bombs Iran
Wayne
Madsen
How
to Live with a Rogue Superpower
Anthony
Gancarski
Iraq and the Death of the West
David
Vest
Earth vs. Bush
Ahmad Faruqui
The Liberation of Iraq in Perspective
Robert
Fisk
We
Bomb, They Suffer
March 22 / 23, 2003
Edward Said
The Other
America
Saul Landau
The Threats of Empire
Kathleen and Bill Christison
On the Road in the West Bank
Joanne Mariner
Suing Seymour Hersh
Ann Harrison
The Battle of San Francisco
Robert Fisk
A Cauldron of Fire
Hani Shukrallah
The Gates of Hell
Chris Floyd
Memory Lane
Kathy Kelly
Imagine Chicago Under This Kind of Attack
Ramzi Kysia
Bombing Away a Chance for Joy
Linda Heard
Baghdad Burns While Bush Does Lunch
Bradley Burston
Could the US be at War for Years?
Salvador Peralta
Mass Murder as Liberation?
Tom Gorman
Now That's a Coalition!
Jorge Mariscal
Johnny Mack, When Are You Coming Back?
Cindy Milstein
The Grassroots Go Global
Josh Frank
Blocking Portland's Bridges
Elaine Cassel
The Case of Elizabeth Smart: Kidnapping and Insanity
Gordon Solberg
Drowning in Niceness: the Lessons of Elizabeth Smart
Tom Crumpacker
Getting to Know the Real Havana
Poets' Basement
Dobie, Guthrie, Alam, Wechsler
March 21, 2003
Ben Tripp
Blood
for Oil: the Exchange Rate
Cathy Breens
Report from Baghdad: Mothers, Kids and Crash Kits
Scott Handleman
Fourth
Generation Protesting: Shutting Down San Francisco
Vanessa Jones
Paint
Them Red
Brian J. Foley
Patriotic
Protest for Professors
Zoltan Grossman
After Saddam, a War on Iraqi Rebels?
Philip S. Golub
Inventing Demons
Richard Lichtman
On the Current Experience of Terror
Milan Rai
Blitz-Coup
Pepe Escobar
A Cheap Family Farce
Floyd Rudmin
The Nightmare at the Back Door: Nuclear Plant's as Terror Targets
Chris Floyd
See Rome (poem)
Website of the War
Iraq
Body Count
March 20, 2003
Jo Wilding
From
Waiting to War: a Day and a Night in Baghdad
Stephen Banko
I Was
a Soldier Once
Kevin Alexander Gray
How Did
We Become an Outlaw Nation?
Shane Claiborne
Nomadic
Solidarity: Glimpses of Life in Baghdad on the Eve of War
Kathy Kelly
Waiting on the Baghdad Skies to Crack
Anthony Gancarski
Michelle
Makin's "Liberty Shields"
Rahul Mahajan and Robert
Jensen
Myths
and Facts About the War on Iraq
Jason Leopold
Cheney's
Lies About Halliburton and Iraq
Ron Jacobs
If War is Business as Usual, There Should be No Business as Usual
Chuck O'Connell
Predictions About the Iraq War
Douglas Herman
US Air Force Veteran on the Coming Air Campaign
Ralph Nader
Come
On Democrats, Stand Up for Peace
William Hughes
War is Theft
Sima Saeedi
Dispatch
from Iran
Hammond Guthrie
John Philip Sousa
Website of the Day
Iraq
Body Count
Hot Stories
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
Burn Your Sweatshop Clothes!
Buy Union Made Apparel!
|
April 5,
2003
A
Road Map to Nowhere
Or Much Ado
About Nothing
By URI AVNERY
This could have been an important
document, IF...
IF all the parties really
wanted to achieve a fair compromise.
IF Sharon and Co. were
really prepared to give back the occupied territories and dismantle
the settlements.
IF the Americans were
willing to exert serious pressure on Israel.
IF there were a president
in Washington like Dwight Eisenhower, who did not give a damn
about Jewish votes and donations.
IF George Bush were convinced
that the Road Map serves his interests, instead of being a bone
to throw to his British poodle.
IF Tony Blair thought
that it serves his interests, instead of being a crumb to throw
to his domestic rivals.
IF the United Nations
had any real power.
IF Europe had any real
power.
IF Russia had any real
power. 
IF my grandmother had
wheels.
All these Ifs belong
to an imaginary world. Therefore, nothing will come from all
the talking about this document. The embryo is dead in the womb
of its mother, the Quartet.
In spite of this, let's
try to treat the matter in all seriousness. Is this a good document?
Could it be helpful, if all the Ifs were realistic?
In order to answer this
seriously, one has to distinguish between the declared objectives
and the road that is supposed to lead to them.
The objectives are very
positive. They are identical with the aims of the Israeli peace
movement: an end to the occupation, the establishment of the
independent State of Palestine side-by-side with the State of
Israel, Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Syrian peace, the integration
of Israel in the region.
In this respect, the
Road Map goes further than the Oslo agreement. In the Oslo "Declaration
of Principles" there was a giant hole: it did not spell
out what was to come after the long interim stages. Without a
clear final aim, the interim stages had no clear purpose. Therefore
the Oslo process died with Yitzhaq Rabin.
The Road Map confirms
that there now exists a worldwide consensus about these objectives.
This fact will remain even if nothing comes out of it. Those
of us who remember that only 35 years ago there were hardly a
handful of people in the world who believed in this vision can
draw profound satisfaction from this Road Map. It shows that
we have won the struggle for world public opinion.
But let's not exaggerate:
in this document, too, there is a gaping hole in the definition
of the aims. It does not say what the borders of the future Palestinian
State should be, neither explicitly nor implicitly. The Green
Line is not even mentioned. That by itself is enough to invalidate
the whole structure. Ariel Sharon talks about a Palestinian state
in 40% of the "territories" equivalent to less
than 9% of Palestine under the British Mandate. Does anyone believe
that this will bring peace?
When we pass from poetry
to prose, from the mountaintop of the aims to the road that is
supposed to get us there, the warning signs become more and more
frequent. This is a perilous road with many curves and obstacles.
Even a very brave athlete would shudder at the thought of having
to run this course.
The road is divided into
phases. In every phase the parties must fulfil certain obligations.
At the end of each phase the Quartet must decide whether the
obligations have been completely fulfilled, before entering the
next one. At the end, the hoped-for peace will come, God willing.
Even if all the parties
were imbued with goodwill, it would be extremely difficult. When
David Lloyd-George, as British Prime Minister, decided to end
the British occupation of Ireland, he observed that one cannot
cross an abyss in two jumps. The initiators of the Road Map propose,
in effect, to cross the Israeli-Palestinian abyss in many small
hops.
First question: who is
this "Quartet" that has to decide at every point whether
the two parties have fulfilled their obligations, and a new phase
can be entered?
At first glance, there
is a balance between the four players: the United Nations, the
United States, Europe and Russia. It is rather like a commercial
arbitration: each side appoints one arbitrator, and the two arbitrators
together choose a third one. Judgement is reached by majority
decision and is binding on both parties.
This could work. The
United States are close to Israel, Europe and Russia are acceptable
to the Palestinians. The UN representative would have the casting
vote.
Not at all. According
to the document, the Quartet must take all decisions unanimously.
The Americans have a veto, which means that Sharon has a veto.
Without his agreement, nothing can be decided. Need more be said?
Second question: When
will it end?
Well, there is no clear-cut
timetable for passing from one phase to the next. The document
vaguely mentions several vague dates, but they are difficult
to take seriously. The first phase should have started in October,
2002, and come to a close in May 2003. In the real world, the
Map will be shown to the Israelis and the Palestinians for the
first time in May, and only then will the serious haggling begin.
Nobody can foresee when the implementation of the first phase
will actually begin. And in the meantime
It should be remembered:
in the Oslo agreements many dates were fixed, and almost all
of them were missed (generally by the Israeli side). As the good
Rabin declared: "There are no sacred dates."
Third question: Is there
any kind of balance between the obligations on the two parties?
The answer must be "no".
In the first phase, the
Palestinians must stop the armed Intifada, establish close security
cooperation with the Israelis and recognize Israel's right to
exist in peace and security. They must also appoint an "empowered"
Prime Minister (meaning, in effect, the neutralization of the
elected president, Yasser Arafat) and start the drafting of a
constitution that will meet with the approval of the Quartet.
What must Israel do at
the same time? It must enable Palestinian officials (note: officials.
This does not apply to the rest of the population) to move from
place to place, improve the humanitarian situation, stop attacks
on civilians and the demolition of homes and pay the Palestinians
the money due to them. Also, it will dismantle "settlement
outposts" erected since Sharon came to power, in violation
of the government's guidelines. Who will decide to whom this
applies? There is also no mention of freezing settlement activity
in this phase.
Does anyone believe that
Prime Minister Abu Mazen could put an end to Hamas and Jihad
attacks without any political quid pro quo at all, and while
the settlements keep expanding?
After this phase, the
Palestinians must reform their institutions, create a constitution
"based on strong parliamentary democracy" (they will
not be allowed to have an American presidential system, for fear
of Arafat retaining some powers). Only then, "as comprehensive
security performance moves forward", the Israeli army will
"withdraw progressively from areas occupied since September
28, 2000". Not immediately, not in one withdrawal, but bit
by bit, "progressively". Not from areas B and C, but
only from area A. They will be where they were before the present
Intifada.
(There is an old Jewish joke about a family that complains about
being crowded together in one room. The rabbi advises them to
bring in a goat, too.
Later, when the family
complains that life has become intolerable, the rabbi tells them
to take the goat out again. Suddenly they feel that they have
a lot of space. This time the Israeli army is told to remove
the goat, but the Palestinians are told to remove father and
mother.)
After all this, the next
phase will start; the Palestinians will adopt their constitution
and hold free elections, the Egyptians and Jordanians will send
their ambassadors back to Israel and the Israeli government will,
at last, freeze settlement activity.
The next phase will focus
on the "possible" creation of an independent Palestinian
state with "provisional borders". So, long after all
attacks have been stopped, there will be an "option"
of creating a Palestinian state in Area A, a tiny part of what
used to be Palestine. According to the Roadmap, this should happen
by the end of 2003, but it is clear that, if at all, this will
come about much later. It is also stated that "further action
on settlements" will be a part of the process. What does
this mean? Not the dismantling of a single settlement, not even
the most remote and isolated one.
After all this comes
about, the Quartet will decide (again: unanimously - only with
the agreement of the Americans) that the time has come for negotiations
aimed at a "permanent status agreement", hopefully
in 2005, including discussion of items such as borders, Jerusalem,
refugees and settlements. If Sharon or his successor want it,
there will be an agreement. In not, then not.
The truth is, in this
whole document there is not one word that Sharon could not accept.
After all, with the help of Bush he can torpedo any step at any
time.
To sum up: Much Ado about
Nothing. As evidenced by the fact that neither Sharon nor the
settlers are upset.
Uri Avnery
is an Israeli journalist. His essays are included in The
Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent.
Today's
Features
Uri
Avnery
A Crooked Mirror: Presstitution and
the Theater of Operations
David
Vest
Can You Hear the Silence?
Anthony
Gancarski
Colin Powell Telemarketer
David
Lindorff
Takoma: the Dolphin Who Refused
to Fight
Michael
Roberts
War, Debts and Deficits
Ramzy
Baroud
Now That Iraqis Are Being Killed Is Israel Any More Secure?
Jo Wilding
From Baghdad with Tears
Anton
Antonowicz
Cluster Bombs on Babylon
Alison
Weir
Israel, We Won't Forget Rachel Corrie
Bruce
Jackson
Hating Wolf Blitzer's Voice
Eliot Katz
War's First Week
Steve
Perry
War Web Log 04/03
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|