LAST WEEK, the Middle East peace process began anew, absent the familiar face of Yasser Arafat. The longtime Palestinian leader was recently sidelined in favor of Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, a new leader uncompromised by terrorist associations. Arafats' absence is seen as key to the success of negotiations, but the more serious obstacle to peace may be Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
Just days after accepting the new "road map" to Peace, Sharon struck the process a critical blow when his troops launched a missile attack against Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi. As Rantisi lay in the hospital recovering from his wounds, a new round of bloodletting began, threatening to derail the peace process entirely.
As a longtime terrorist leader responsible for numerous deaths, Rantisi was a legitimate target of Israeli attack. But the timing of last week's strike suggests that is was less a security measure than a calculated attempt to undermine the peace process. Israel attacked Rantisi not during an outbreak of terrorist violence, but at the outset of a new peace process, when the Palestinian Authority was struggling to negotiate a cease fire with Hamas and other radical groups. The attempt on Rantisi's life ended any immediate hope of a cease fire and ignited a new round of violence whose biggest casualty may be the peace process itself.
In years past, such recklessness could be dismissed with a wink and a nod from Washington, but amid the war on terrorism, the United States can no more afford a failed peace process than Israel. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a major wellspring of Islamic terrorism, and America must pursue the peace process as vigorously as it has pursued Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
If the road map is to be salvaged, President George W. Bush must demand that Israel cease its provocative attacks on Palestinians and cooperate fully in the peace process. Since Sharon is unmoved by words alone, the administration must take more forceful action to compel Israel's compliance with the "road map."
The best means of doing this would be to link Israel's economic and military aid to a periodic review of the country's efforts to achieve peace.
Since 1976, Israel has been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, receiving an annual grant of nearly $3 billion in recent years. These contributions represent an enormous lever with which to move Sharon toward the bargaining table, and the Bush Administration should make better use of it. Instead of granting these billions unconditionally, the United States must insist on Israeli cooperation in the peace process as a condition of continuing aid.
Such a measure would clip the wings of Israeli hawks and reduce their ability to launch deal-breaking attacks, should their belligerence continue. But linking aid to Israel's efforts at peace would be equally important as a symbolic gesture. America's desire for peace will seem shallow if Israeli obstructionism is met only with the administration's verbal condemnation. By holding Israel accountable for its actions in the occupied territories, the United States can demonstrate a real commitment to peace and to the measures that are needed to achieve it.
Attaching conditions to Israel's aid may seem sacrilegious, but such measures are entirely logical. The United States contributes billions annually in order to provide for Israel's security. If a long-term settlement of the Palestinian conflict is in Israel's security interest (and even Sharon admits that it is), then America should not allow its money to be spent on activities that undermine the peace process.
But Israeli security is not the only thing at stake in the current peace process. In the post-September 11 world, the United States has an equally compelling interest in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A successful peace process would vastly improve Arab perceptions of America and remove a major impetus to Islamic radicalism. Given the importance of these developments to American security, the United States cannot allow the peace process to be held hostage by Ariel Sharon and the Israeli right.
The notion that Israel must receive unconditional American support is foolish and increasingly dangerous in a world plagued by terrorism. The United States has long demanded that other recipients of its aid conduct themselves in a manner consistent with American interests, and it is high time the same was expected of Israel. If the Bush Administration is to protect America's investment in the peace process and promote stability in the Middle East, it must stop tolerating Sharon's obstructionism and demand Israeli compliance with the "road map."
(Alec Solotorovsky is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at asolotorovsky@cavalierdaily.com)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
