Colin Powell: out. Condoleezza Rice: in. Ariel Sharon: hanging on. Yasser Arafat: out forever. But the most important entry on Middle East watchers’ list is George W. Bush: in for four more years.
The recent death of Arafat, the Palestinian Authority president, creates an opportunity for the United States to influence events in the Middle East, and every one of Bush’s decisions in recent days suggests that he is ready to flex muscles.
Bush underlined his hopes for Palestinian statehood in his statement Tuesday nominating Rice to replace Powell as U.S. secretary of state.
“We’re pursuing a positive new direction to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, an approach that honors the peaceful aspirations of the Palestinian people through a democratic state, and an approach that will ensure the security of our good friend, Israel,” Bush said. “Meeting all of these objectives will require wise and skillful leadership at the Department of State, and Condi Rice is the right person for that challenge.”
Bush also appointed Rice’s deputy, Stephen Hadley, to replace her as national security adviser.
Both promotions suggest a tightening of an already close U.S.-Israel relationship. Powell had been the most powerful voice in the administration arguing for greater pressure on the Israeli prime minister to ease conditions for the Palestinians; it was often Rice who backpedaled on criticisms of Israel issued by Powell’s State Department.
Hadley helped draft Bush’s historic April 14 recognition of some Israeli claims to the West Bank and a rejection of the Palestinian demand that refugees be granted a “right of return” to their former homes in Israel.
Still, the significance of the appointments lies less in the pro-Israel credentials of Rice and Hadley than in the fact that Bush wants to run an efficient foreign policy, without the interagency tensions that marked his first administration.
“The degree of fighting between Defense and State made things impossible,” William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, told this week’s annual General Assembly of the United Jewish Communities, the umbrella organization of the North American Jewish federation system.
For Israel, a tighter ship in Washington means an even easier ride when the two nations are in agreement — and more pointed pressure when they are not.
Both Israel and its Arab neighbors would do well to heed advice from Rice, said Edward Walker, president of the Middle East Institute and a former assistant secretary of state for the Near East.
“Condi has great credibility in having the ear of the president,” Walker said. “When she speaks, people will be listening as if the president is talking. She’s not going to have the problems Powell had; she has the kind of identification and access Colin Powell never had.”
Bush’s administration already has made clear its short-term policy goals in the Middle East: a clean ride for the Palestinians toward Jan. 9 presidential elections.
Bush may be more willing to take chances with a new Palestinian leadership than he was with Arafat, whom Bush rejected for his ties to terrorism, Walker said.
The administration has warned Israel that it wants to see cooperation ahead of the Palestinian election, urging the Israeli army to pull back from Palestinian towns and villages and Israeli officials to allow Palestinians in eastern Jerusalem to vote.
“It’s something that needs to be discussed further as we approach the Palestinian elections,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Tuesday about Jerusalem voters.
Bush also is determined to see Israel withdraw from the Gaza Strip next year, as Sharon has promised. Bush sees the pull-out not as an end in itself but as a return to the U.S.-led “road map” peace plan and direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
The pressure has had an effect.
“If in time we see that there is a Palestinian leadership that is willing to fight terror, we can have security coordination,” Sharon said Tuesday in a meeting with officials from his Likud Party, according to a Reuters report.
It was the most explicit signal from Sharon to date that he could return to direct talks after the Palestinian elections.
Even if Sharon chafes at such pressure, Bush’s determination may have a salutary effect on Sharon’s political prospects. No potential candidate for prime minister in Israel wants to be seen to be in direct conflict with Washington, and the clearer Bush’s message has been, the more Sharon’s potential challengers have fallen into line.
Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week withdrew his threat to resign if Sharon did not put the Gaza withdrawal to a referendum. On Monday, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom softened his opposition to allowing eastern Jerusalem Palestinians to vote, telling the UJC General Assembly that there would be “no booths” in eastern Jerusalem but not ruling out a repeat of a mail-in voting system like the one used in 1996.
Palestinian officials liked Powell, but say they aren’t disheartened by his departure. Instead, they’re looking for more signals from Bush.
“It’s not a question of individuals but a larger one of policy by the administration as a whole,” Diana Buttu, a legal adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team, told JTA from Ramallah.
Rice’s reputation as adamantly pro-Israel may be overblown, said Buttu, who dealt with the national security adviser during Bush’s efforts to launch the road map in summer 2003.
Rice “got it” when Buttu’s team presented her with a map showing expanded Jewish settlement in the West Bank and a projected route of the security fence that would have sliced up the area, Buttu said.
Intense U.S. pressure led Israel to change the route of the fence, bringing it closer to the pre-1967 boundary with the West Bank.
The Palestinian leadership is split between two views, Buttu said. One has it that Bush, freed from re-election considerations, will pressure Israel so that his legacy will include a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. The other view is that Bush is irrevocably pro-Israel.
Go with the latter version, advises Tom Neumann, executive director of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.
“George Bush has a commitment to Israel based on his own view of what the world is about,” Neumann said.
In that view, Neumann said, support for Israel conforms with Bush’s commitment to spreading democracy throughout the world.
Bush already had read Natan Sharansky’s new book, “The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror,” when he invited the Israeli Cabinet minister to meet last week.
Significantly, Rice told Sharansky she was reading the book too — at Bush’s recommendation.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
