"PHASE 1 FAILURE RESULTED
IN A SECURITY FENCE"

Written by Jo-ana D'Balcazar, M.A.
Political Analyst in International Relations
specializing in the Middle East Crisis
and the European Union.














AUGUST 15, 2003 - Despite the much-talked ROADMAP as a problem-solver of the Arab-Israeli conflict, recent acts have shown that indeed it was another faulty peace program just as the failed Oslo Agreement. What went wrong? Simply, the Roadmap did not focus on the root of the problem, which is to immediately eradicate terrorism within the Palestinian Authority and the disputed lands of Gaza, Judea, Samaria (West Bank), but forcing Israel into making concessions while violence from the other side never stops.

The Roadmap has stopped in Phase I and the fence became a necessity as a response to the continuous Arab-Palestinians' empty promises of stopping terrorism. Phase I demands an immediate cease of terrorism, not a truce to a temporary cease-fire, nor negotiations with terrorist groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad that have not renounced to their agenda of destroying Israel. President George W. Bush statement that the fence is a problem for peacemaker is off the mark.

Should not Pres. Bush instead say firmly that the problem is the ongoing terrorism? The U.S., which only in words sustains "not to negotiate with terrorism," accepted the illusion of the terrorist trio truce. The inconsistency stems from the fact that while the U.S. State Department lists Hamas and Islamic Jihad as terrorist groups, it criticizes Israel when it tries to eradicate the terrorist infrastructures, while gladly accepting the false truce when indeed Hamas and Islamic Jihad did not offer a complete cease-fire, but only a temporary one, which they cleverly used while they re-armed themselves as sustained by many.

Moreover, the U.S. State Department instead of going after the terrorists, is hinting even more to sanction Israel if it pursues with the fence construction. This raises the question: can the U.S. accept a fake Al-Qaeda truce? Either the U.S. stands firm by its foreign policy or accepts the consequences for its continuous mistakes. Unfortunately, U.S. mediated negotiations have not accomplished the much envisioned peace.

The fence is not serving as a permanent frontier but just as a defense to protect Israelis from the Arab-Palestinians. Actually, the fence has been part of the "disengagement initiative" to separate Israelis and Arab-Palestinians as suggested by then Israeli National Security Adviser Uzi Dayan during PM Ehud Barak's administration. Dayan no longer in the government still supports the concept of a fence. The original idea of a barrier was to block Palestinian cars from crossing the Green Line, which is the 54-year-old boundary that separates Israel proper from the West Bank.

The problem with the fence is that it may mark permanent borders. If Arab-Palestinians fear the fence will become a permanent border, then, it is up to them to demand the Palestinian Authority to take effective actions against terrorism to continue peace negotiations, not rely only on empty promises.

The Bush administration should pressure the PA to really take a direct-action to fight terrorism, and not condemn Israel, an ally and democratic state, on its efforts to protect its citizens by building a security fence. Otherwise, it sends an inconsistent message on the fight against terrorism. Israel has no choice and it is forced to build the fence because the threat of terrorism is still alive.

According to the roadmap, the final border will be determined by negotiations between the two sides. The point to remember is that this is not a permanent border but instead just a security border emerging as a response to the ongoing terrorism coming from Judea and Samaria (West Bank). This is totally different from the border between Israel and Jordan, which also helps both sides in blocking attackers and avoids damaging friendly relations between the two.

Nevertheless, will this fence effectively curb terrorism from Judea and Samaria? It might, just as the fence built along the northern border when Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon, and the fence between Israel and Syria in the Golan Heights. It might not work if the PA does not make a drastic change in the eradication of terrorism and their infrastructures even within its own government including al-Fatah, Tanzim, and Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade. Absolutely, there is no middle way.

On the other hand, some argue that the Bush administration might be considering withholding part of the recently approved $10 billion emergency aid package for Israel , consisting of $9 billion in loan guarantees and $1 billion in direct aid in an attempt to force Israel to re-route parts of the fence closer to the Green Line. If this is true, the Bush administration might find strong opposition by both Republicans and Democrats, if decided to reduce aid to Israel. For instance, last week, Congressman Steny Hoyer, said in Israel that he will "work to defeat" any proposed deduction.

Will Sharon make the mistake stop the construction of the fence as PM Barak did, or insist on further negotiations? Just as the time when Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat rejected the offer at Camp David in 2000, it now appears that Arafat has not, nor ever have the will to stop terrorism. The model is the same, not taking responsibility for the insufficient compliance of arresting terrorists and confiscating their weapons to end the incitement against Israel, but instead, putting the blame on Israel.

PM Abu Mazen can keep promising to fight terrorism but those are empty promises and only give more time for the rearmament of terrorist groups. Hence, a separation is needed, but the most effective way to eradicate terrorism is not just the fence but taking a direct-action to eradicate terrorism within Judea and Samaria. Otherwise, Israel will always be living next to terrorists and will never have a complete independence as a free democratic state but will constantly have to fight for its right to exist. Consequently, it is not unrealistic to demand the dismantling of the PA, which is the source of all terrorism.

Let us not forget that the PA was previously the Palestinian Liberation Organization and as of today it is responsible and applauds the most horrendous terrorist activities to destroy Israel. Can a passive Israeli position convert the terrorist groups from their goal of destroying Israel as a state? I do not think so. Will the world continue to cheer the shameful killing by homicide bombers of innocent Israelis, just as the Romans cheered the killing of thousand innocents at the Coliseum? You have the answer.

THIS ARTICLE was written by Political Analyst in International Relations,
specializing in the Middle East Crisis and the European Union, Jo-ana D'Balcazar, M.A.

LAST DAYS WORLDWATCH continues to monitor movements and events in the Middle East
to report information and news that will never appear in the general world press.



Questions, Feedback or Comments Welcomed!
please Email Dr Gary Forbes right now.



A WWW GLOBAL SERVICE FROM

Newcastle, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
(C) Copyright 2006 Dr. Gary Forbes, DM MA.