Over the Weekend
After his visit with nominal Palestinian Authority (PA) PM Abu Mazen, Secretary of State Powell spoke with Israel’s Channel 2 TV. Asked how Abu Mazen could control terror in the PA, “if Arafat still controls most of the Palestinian security organizations?” Mr. Powell responded, “Well, Arafat controls some, (Abu Mazen) controls some. There is a bifurcated situation right now, which I would rather not see, but this is the way it is.”
After his visit with nominal Palestinian Authority (PA) PM Abu Mazen, Secretary of State Powell spoke with Israel’s Channel 2 TV. Asked how Abu Mazen could control terror in the PA, “if Arafat still controls most of the Palestinian security organizations?” Mr. Powell responded, “Well, Arafat controls some, (Abu Mazen) controls some. There is a bifurcated situation right now, which I would rather not see, but this is the way it is.”
“This is the way it is?” Did we say that when the Taliban gave sanctuary to Al Qaeda? Did we say that when Saddam defied the UN? Did we say that when the UN refused to back up its own resolutions? Why does Mr. Powell accept what is not acceptable when the issue is the security of Israel?
The sine qua non of President Bush’s 24 June 2002 speech was that the Palestinians would “elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror.” It’s bad enough that Abu Mazen is compromised up to his eyebrows, and that he was hand-picked by Arafat in a way that had nothing to do with the Palestinian people electing anyone, but for an American Secretary of State to accept Arafat’s continued control of armed, terrorist factions as inevitable is outrageous.
But no less so than his response to the “double standard” question regarding America’s targeted killings of Al Qaeda terrorists, roadblocks in Iraq and the inadvertent deaths of civilians in crossfire. Acknowledging Israel’s right to self defense “if it sees somebody coming at them with the intent of conducting a terror act,” Mr. Powell nevertheless added, “I think there is a difference … We were in an active war, declared conflict.” So, if the Palestinians don’t officially declare their war to be a war it doesn’t count? And those who indoctrinate, mastermind, arm and send the bombers on their missions should be immune to Israeli retaliation because their role is not what Mr. Powell called a “real and present danger” but rather “a more expansive set of targeted assassinations”? And, he asked, “how effective is this in terms of actually moving forward with the process?”
Call it the return of the “peace process” or the Son-of-Oslo process; call it whatever you like. We call it trouble. When the priority is how an action affects the “process” rather than how it affects the security and legitimacy of Israel, or how it advances democratic institution building for the Palestinians, the U.S. is back in the mode of pressuring Israel for real concessions or the Palestinians for phony promises.
The Road Map was created with input from neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis, meaning that the Quartet has more of an interest in its continuation than either of the parties that have to respond to their own priorities. And the Palestinians made it clear this weekend that although they “accept” the Road Map, they have no intention of meeting its first demand – a single authority to root out the organizations and institutions of terror. If the best Mr. Powell can do is sigh over the way things are and be concerned about the “process,” for better or worse for all concerned, the enterprise is doomed.