The New Nation - Internet Edition

Md. Masum Billah

Bush closed down his eight day Middle East trip in the middle of the first month of the New Year sparkling questions concerning various issues particularly Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Iran's nuclear deal. But the most significant focus of his tour has been cast on the resumed peace process between Israel and Palestine which remained dormant for more than seven years as it received very scant importance from Bush administration. George Bush's visit to Ramallah tends to show green signal for Middle East peace process as he called for an end to Israeli 41 year's occupation of Palestinian lands and stated a commitment to forge a peace agreement before the end of his tenure in office in next January (2009). Bush said "I believe its going to happen that there's going to be a signed peace treaty by the time I leave office." He further emphasized that the Palestinian refugees to be paid compensation for the loss of homes when they had fled during establishment of Israel.

A plethora of questions peep in the minds of the political critics. Should the Middle East people believe in this promise? Are the Americans so honest in sponsoring peace deal particularly in the Middle East issue? If we cast our sight at the tour with a third view it shows that Bush wants to score a foreign policy triumph before he leaves office next January. America worries about the supposed serious threat from Iran which continues its nuclear peace process. Bush wants to set a thief to catch a thief. This is why he has offered to sell $20 billion of advance weaponry to Arab Allies including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates to bolster their defense against Iran,' a close ally of Syria. In a brief appearance with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak , Bush dealt gently with the pace of political reform in Egypt the issue that has most distanced administration from the historical partner, the first Arab state to make peace with Israel and the recipient of the most US aid except Israel. "I emphasized that the Palestinians question, of course, is the core of problems and conflict in the Middle East" Mubarak told the reporters after he and Bush met and had lunch at the Red Sea resort. Arab states are not shy enough in criticizing Bush's arms-length approach. Mubarak was among those who told Bush that he was creating a larger problem by telling the issue faster and by feeding the perception that he is too partial to Israel. Syria candidly said that the main aim of Bush's Middle East tour was to scare Persian Gulf countries into buying weapons by portraying Iran as threat.

Palatine state must be viable and contiguous whereas, the eight mile long corridor between Gaza and the West Bank belongs to Israel. Without connecting Gaza Strip with the West Bank a Palestinian state would be unstable and vulnerable. "If the corridor is handed over to the Palestinian, Palestinians would be contiguous in that case. There is no agreement between Israel and Palestinian authority for sharing water and electricity. The continued presence of some 220000 Jewish settlers in much covered West Bank remains a big question. The segregation wall of 425 miles long covering some Palestinian land particularly best cultivable is another tactic of Israeli government to grab Palestinian land in the name of Israeli security. These are the key issues of Israel including future of Jerusalem and Palestine refugees. Until and unless these issues will not find proper and true attention from Israel and its 'guru' this tour will hardly bring any tangible solution.

Question arise further has Bush administration given up their strategic goals in Asia after the sad and unexpected experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan? Actually it retains long term interest in these regions. The recent tour to the Middle East gives hints that it has far reaching plan about the Middle East, Persian Gulf and the whole of Asia. Just after the tour Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert warned that Israel and Palestine might not reach a peace deal that Bush predicted with a year as both sides began discussing core issues. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livini and former Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei met in Jerusalem.

The meeting lasted for two hours in a good and constructive environment. They discussed the core issues and agreed to continue these talks on an intensive basis." I'm not sure we can reach an agreement and I'm not sure we can reach its implementation." A senior government official said quoting the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert." But I will be committing a sin to my duty if I didn't try." The opposition and the head of the opposition want to maintain the status quo at any price. "I say this is dangerous, adventurous and irresponsible." Olmert actually faces internal criticism over the talks, with two member of his coalition threatening quit if core issues are discussed.

In the meantime Israel has ordered all border crossings into Gaza temporarily closed. The tightening of the blockade could make life more difficult for Gaza's already impoverished residents. Palestinians have already suffered shortages of food, fuel, spare parts of car, computer, paper and other supplies since Israel imposed the siege after Hamas seized the territory in June. "It is imperative that these crossings are opened so that the dire situation in Gazans does not deteriorate further, inflicting further misery on one and half million people who live there." Christopher Genness, the spokesman for UNRWA, the UN Agency in charge of Palestinian refugees commented. Closing the crossings can only lead to the further radicalization of a depressed and demoralized people. Past experience has shown such kind of development. Tel Aviv must take into account that security of Israel is not an isolated fact rather it is related to economic situation of the Gazans and the people huddled in the refugee camps. When they have no food and drink due to this closure, they must respond to it according to their ways they have resorted so long years. Why the already inflicted people have further been infuriated? Don't they attach any importance or significance to what George Bush has said regarding the peace deal? Israelis must show restraint otherwise the world will take Bush's visit just as forging united force in the Middle East to wage war against Iran which will definitely bring irreparable loss to either side.

The increasing violence has clouded Israeli-Palestinian peace talks resumed after a Middle East Conference in Annapolis Conference and the ray of hope which emanated from the recent tour of Bush to the Middle East. Should it be allowed to happen? In Annapolis Conference Bush claimed, "The foundation for establishment of a new nation a democratic Palestinian state that will live side by side with Israel in peace and security." Let this tour be considered as a part of this claim clouding the other presumption.