New Opportunity for the New Year

The year begins with a promising event — Palestinians going to the polls to vote for a new president to succeed Yasser Arafat, the legendary father of Palestine who died in November. While it is nearly certain that Mahmoud Abbas, known as Abu Mazen, will be the winner, the slate of seven candidates indicates a new era for Palestinian governance.

For the last four years President Arafat served as the comprehensive excuse for both Israeli Prime Minister Sharon and President Bush, allowing both to ignore entreaties from near and far to resume a political peace process. Now, Arafat's demise has become the rationale for a direly needed push for the two-state solution that could end the long and bloody conflict.

In the initial phase, the emphasis for action will be directed toward the Palestinians — to cease violence and reform the institutional structures of the Palestinian Authority.  That will be the limited agenda of the conference that British PM Tony Blair is planning early in the new year. While Palestinian elections and governance reform will not resolve the conflict, the fresh flow of international donor aid and political attention could relieve Palestinians' despair and restore confidence that they may thrive and be free in their own state at last.

Elected to a second term, President Bush appears to be committed to fulfilling his vision of two states, living side by side in peace. The challenge for advocates of peace will be to ensure that the political, economic and societal needs of a viable Palestinian state are adequately met - psychologically and geographically. Advocates for peace will need at the same time to provide Israelis with assurances that real peace, and regional acceptance, will result from their ending the occupation and returning land to Palestinians for their sovereign state.

The contest among Israelis about the future of the settlements will be tremendously agonizing and potentially dangerous. Assuming that P.M. Sharon genuinely intends to carry out his Gaza withdrawal plan, he risks civil strife between religious and secular Jewish Israelis as well as violent resistance from the more militant settlers.  The opening salvo could be sparked by the Road Map's call for the removal of the "outposts," which are intended by their young and radical founders to thwart efforts to restrain Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

President Bush wants to, and needs to, improve strained relations with European allies, whose help he needs, especially in Iraq and with Iran policy. British P.M.Tony Blair is pressing his friend in the White House toward closer collaboration with the European Union in jump-starting the Road Map plan in order to calm the Israel-Palestinian conflict. NATO might provide a vehicle for U.S.-EU cooperation; NATO has been proposed for a third-party role as the Israeli military withdraws from the West Bank, and there is talk of Israel becoming part of NATO. Israel has long resisted any outside constraints on its military actions, but NATO's secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, is going there in the spring for talks. 

Expectations of Support in Congress

Unlike the congressional opposition by the conservatives to the Oslo agreements of the 1990s, the Israeli right may find a more united congressional front in support of President Bush's requests relative to Israeli-Palestinian matters. Partisan rancor on this particular issue is weakening, as shown by reports that the House majority whip, Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) and House minority whip, Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-VA) were bunkmates on a December trip to the region (one of five high-level congressional tours to the Middle East since Arafat's Nov. 11 death).

It is expected that President Bush will request Congressional appropriation of considerable financial aid for Palestinian development and institution building, beginning with help for the January election. If settlement evacuation does take place, surely Congress will be asked to provide additional funds to Israel as well.  

War or Peace for Syria?

Syria will certainly be in the news in 2005. In a strange twist, the U.S. is discouraging Israel from resuming negotiations with Syria.  In the last year, Syria has repeatedly offered to reopen talks with Israel's leaders, and recently the Israeli defense minister, the military chief of staff and the head of intelligence have all spoken out in favor.

Some U.S. officials are concerned that Syrian-Israeli talks would delay progress with the Palestinians.  Other officials are eager to chastise, or do worse to, Syria for its alleged support for Iraqi insurgents and Palestinian terrorist groups. One Israeli official, quoted in the Dec. 17 issue of the Forward, said, "It really wouldn't look good if Israel legitimizes Syria's regime by resuming peace talks when there is talk in Washington about striking Syria militarily."  

Crisis with Iran Looms

The convoluted effort to determine if Iran's nuclear ambitions are a threat and if so, how to deal with it, is a cliffhanger. The Administration has been split on policy towards Iran. Some urge warmer relations, working cooperatively with Europe, and recognizing that Iran has legitimate interests in Iraq. The hawkish neoconservatives, in collaboration with rightwing Israelis, are ready for preemptive bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities. A major worry is that if Iran develops nuclear weapons, Arab neighbors such as Saudi Arabia will feel compelled to do so as well.

There is a chance that the Iran crisis could open the door for consideration of a regional regime for control of weapons of mass destruction.  A "common security" approach for WMD control is most likely to make progress alongside movement toward a comprehensive resolution of the broader Arab-Israeli conflict.  

Iraq Tragedy Worsens

The Bush Administration wants to see Iraq stabilized so U.S. troops can leave. But violence against troops and cooperating Iraqis is escalating with no improvement in sight.  Hope has withered that the upcoming elections would open the door for a new democratic and unified state. It can be expected that within Congress, and the American public, the debate on who is to blame and what to do will be hot and heavy. A full scale popular opposition to the war itself, with demands that U.S. troops leave Iraq, is possible.

It is impossible to predict at this time how the Iraq war will play out. The mounting death tolls of Iraqi people as well as American and coalition personnel, along with deficit-producing supplemental appropriations for war costs, cannot long be obscured by flippant upbeat assessments from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Most people have awakened from the neoconservative dream that Iraq would be a model for the formation of secular democracies throughout the region.

The notion that religious authority must be and can be expunged from politics in the Middle East is challenged by reality. Some experts on Islam have an alternative view. Reuel Marc Gerecht, a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, and a former CIA specialist, argues that devout followers of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, a Shiite cleric, offer not just the best hope for democracy, but really the only one.  

Reform Is on the Agendas

Cynics can easily dismiss the President's call for democratization and "reform" of Arab states and Iranian governance as disingenuous and intended to distract from his economic and cultural imperialist objectives. Nevertheless, the clarion call of liberty is heard purely by oppressed people, and there are many throughout the Middle East. In 2005, the debate about reform in the Arab world will be huge and widespread. The leader of a pro-reform NGO in Syria, quoted by columnist Tom Friedman, said, "For some people it forced the reform issue, because they said 'Let's change ourselves before the Americans change us.' Some Arab liberals want to use the U.S. presence to pressure their governments to go ahead with reform. But in one way or another, the Iraqi issue is forcing the issue of reform on everyone."