Road Map Rising

From melancholy to the Middle East...not so distant a voyage considering the roots of the word melancholy, literally meaning 'black bile'. The Middle East, coveted land of black bile and broken dreams; that wicked and mysterious gateway to the "East". The Annapolis summit on Mid-East Peace began yesterday with all the usual fanfare, the obligatory Joint Statement, high-flung speeches re-hashed from older yet equally high-flung speeches, the subtle accusations and counter-accusations. Nothing new really, except for two passing remarks, one in President's Bush's closing speech, in which he states:

“The time is right [to re-start the Israeli-Palestinian peace process] because the battle is under way for the future of the Middle East. And we must not cede victory to the extremists, with their violent actions and contempt for human life,” Bush said.

The time is right indeed...nearly 5 years after the publication of Bush's silver-bullet Road Map (the quintessential in high-flinging) and already more than 2 years behind the document's original 2005 deadline for a final status agreement.

Dates, naturally, can change.

What hasn't changed is the document itself - still a nebulous collection of wishful thoughts and amorphous visions. But that's besides the point. What's striking to me in Bush's statement is the phrase "for the future of the Middle East." Which version of the future is he talking about here? Is it the future Palestinians and Israelis want or is it the very specific future imagined by Corporate America? Is it the aspirations of Jews and Muslims or the ambition of free market capitalism? Yes, "we must not cede victory to the extremists", all of them: capitalists, economic imperialists and Islamists. The whole stinkin' lot. But I don't think this is what Bush meant.

If the Joint Statement, is any indication, the U.S. apparently plans on a long and, ultimately, prosperous 'engagement' with the Middle East. In its closing paragraph it states:

The parties further commit to continue the implementation of the ongoing obligations of the road map until they reach a peace treaty. The United States will monitor and judge the fulfillment of the commitment of both sides of the road map. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, implementation of the future peace treaty will be subject to the implementation of the road map, as judged by the United States.

The emphases are mine. So, it is the U.S. that will decide who is holding up their end of the bargain or not. America will decide if the time is ripe for future treaties. In other words, the Bush administration will control the entire process, and, from its past performance I think its accurate to say that the neo-cons will try to engineer a beneficial result for U.S. interests. Oddly, in the Road Map document, nowhere does it state that the U.S. will have this sort of power. Everywhere in the text, references are made to the "Quartet" (U.S., European Union, U.N. and Russia) as the final arbiter of the negotiation process. That in itself is troublesome but to now shift the responsibility fully to the U.S. is downright dirty. Why not instead appoint a neutral third party to monitor and decide on the progress toward reaching the benchmarks outlined in the Road Map?

The U.S. has lost all credibility in the eyes of the Palestinian people while more and more Israelis are also starting to question whether or not America has their interests in mind. It's time for the neo-cons to step aside, melt into the background, and, ultimately, show some humility.