Is America backing off the road-map?

America proved last week that it still calls the shots in the Middle East, when it wants to.  Last Thursday, after a string of suicide bombings, the Israeli cabinet declared its intention to remove Yasir Arafat from the territories, and an IDF unit moved within yards of Arafat's small enclave in Ramallah.  Within hours a resounding 'no' came down from the White House, and Israel backed off.

The lesson is that America can get what it wants, when it chooses to speak decisively.

The other lesson is that, should the roadmap fail, it will not be, as its critics contend, because of design flaws or lack of feasibility.  The culprits will be those on all sides who refused to observe its terms, including its sponsors.

Part of the wisdom of the roadmap is its vagueness.  As former State Department official Aaron Miller has said, "There is no such thing as an implementable peace plan - the details have to be worked out through negotiation and mediation."  Thus in formulating the roadmap, the intention was for the US to provide a generally agreed upon framework, and then fill in all the cracks through active engagement and careful prodding - "riding herd," is what the President called it after Aqaba.

But the Administration has barely saddled up.  Instead of being filled in constructively by the US, the cracks in the roadmap have instead widened into dangerous chasms.  In the three months since Aqaba, Israelis and Palestinians have refused to move forward and take the action spelled out by the roadmap - and the US, rather than pushing both sides to implement their respective promises, has so far sat on the sidelines.

What to do about Arafat?

Now, instead of figuring out how to end terror and proceed with negotiations, the Israeli-Palestinian debate has once again devolved into a debate over Yasir Arafat.  The argument over Arafat is thorny, with even Israel's security establishment divided over what constitutes the right move.  Some are absolutely convinced that Arafat would be less popular and do less damage outside the territories than he does in Ramallah.

But nearly a year ago to the day Israel was presented with the lesson that the surest way to boost Arafat was to target him for exile, or worse.  On September 20th, 2002, the IDF began a 10 day siege of the Muqata that ended with a previously scorned and unpopular Arafat emerging victorious to throngs of Palestinian supporters who had come to his defense. (read more about this)  The same victory scene repeated itself last week in the courtyard of the Muqata.

Every time Arafat's popularity plummets, an outside attack revives him.  Veteran Ha'aretz analyst Ze'ev Schiff noted that, "with one decision, the Israeli cabinet succeeded in resurrecting Yasser Arafat, whose importance appeared to be declining both internationally and in the Arab world."
There's no question that Arafat's resurgence is a setback to the peace effort.  Many feel that it means the end of the roadmap, and that the Abu Mazen tenure proved that the 'new leadership' lauded by the Bush administration was never more than a mirage.

But Arafat is an obstacle primarily because he is blocking those moderate and reformist Palestinians who want to unify the security forces and get on with the task of ending terrorism - in other words, those who want to implement policies that a majority of Palestinians support.  The moderates in Palestinian society have been caught in the deadly crossfire of Arafat's obstructionism on the one hand, and the terrorism of groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the other.

The question to ask if we want to stop the violence is, what actions will strengthen these moderates and enable them to move forward?  Expelling Arafat would still allow him the opportunity to block progress, especially democratic reform, whether over the telephone from his place of exile or through the international media that would follow his inevitable world tour.

Practically speaking, there is no safe way to simply remove Arafat from the scene.  Uzi Arad, a former Mossad official and foreign affairs advisor to former Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, told the New York Times, "This is not something that can be done overnight, in a sloppy way... Much as I think he was a bad leader for the Palestinians and all concerned, it's in [Israel's] interest to give him an offer that doesn't humiliate him or the Palestinian people."

Killing him, as the US Administration also realizes, would elevate him to near mythical status and would essentially kill the peace process once and for all.  It would radicalize Palestinian politics, dealing a lethal blow to the moderates we are trying to strengthen and likely ensuring the end of the two state solution.  And, as was evidenced by the almost universal reaction to the suggestion of assassination, it would estrange Israel from most of the world.

Israelis can justifiably complain that the world seems to care more about an isolated leader who condones violence than they care about the violent situation itself.  But reality is more subtle:  Israel's case would be stronger if the security fence were closer to the green line, if the illegal outposts were being dismantled, and if it wouldn't talk so explicitly about Arafat's imminent demise.  Nevertheless, though Israel's public relations might be easier with different policies, it would not remove the fundamental security problem facing Israel: that Arafat continues to condone terrorism within his ranks.

Don't let one man defeat the process

The best way to deal with Arafat right now, really the best of an unhappy set of options, is to implement the roadmap in spite of his power-plays.  America can still work with the new Prime Minister to again achieve a cease-fire and head-off the escalating war between Israel and Hamas before it destroys all the gains of the past year.  Regarding the Palestinian leadership, the original theory of the roadmap still stands - if the Palestinians see the benefits of the peace process, they will continue on the path towards democracy, reform, and non-violence, and abandon the path of corruption and violence endorsed by Arafat.

Opponents may argue that this approach has been tried and failed.  But the reality is that the strategy was never given a fair shake, due to the weakness of the first Palestinian prime minister, a skeptical Israel which offered almost no support, and an almost non-existent US policy.

If the US doesn't want Israel to take the logical step of ridding itself of Arafat, it has to take some action itself to save the situation. What America must do, if it wants to avoid failure for its own sake and help its best friend in the region, is end the current pattern of risking little and achieving even less.

Unfortunately, the end result of the past month's fiasco is that no one in the region takes the US seriously anymore.  American policy has become all words and no action -- all watching the herd, but no riding.  In the wake of an apparent victory in Iraq, the Arab world--and especially the Palestinians -- was ready to give the US the benefit of the doubt.

Now the US appears uninvolved and preoccupied with the deteriorating situation in Baghdad.  Occasionally the administration resurfaces to stop Sharon from building a fence too far from the green line, or to cut off talk of ousting Arafat.  But to be taken seriously, the US needs to be active around the clock, with a high profile representative on the scene with close ties to the President.  Only then will both sides, and especially the Palestinians, take actions to advance the roadmap.

The administration -- by assuming that nothing can be done now -- engages in a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Mideast diplomacy is not a spectator sport, and it's not a matter of coming up with panaceas.  Instead, it requires hard work, persuasion, and tough talk.  Otherwise, the Arab-Israeli scene, and American credibility throughout the Middle East, will deteriorate to record lows.

There's no exit lane on this roadmap - only a cliff, from which, as Secretary of State Colin Powell has warned, both sides are now primed to fall.  It's time for America to act now, and drag both sides away from the edge, or risk being dragged down with them.

-- Written by Steve Spiegel and Gilead Light