Middle East News
ANALYSIS: Jerusalem sidelined, as clock ticking for negotiations
By DPA
May 15, 2008, 15:21 GMT

Jerusalem - US President George W Bush, marking 60 years since Israel was founded with a highly-supportive address to its Knesset, outlined his vision for the Middle East in another 60 years.

'Israel will be celebrating its 120th anniversary as one of the world's great democracies, a secure and flourishing homeland for the Jewish people. The Palestinian people will have the homeland they have long dreamed of and deserved,' he told the Israeli parliament.

'From Cairo and Riyadh, to Baghdad and Beirut, people will live in free and independent societies. ... Iran and Syria will be peaceful nations, where today's oppression is a distant memory. ... And al- Qaeda, Hezbollah and Hamas will be defeated.'

But just eight months from the deadline, it is still unclear whether a key part of that vision - a peace agreement between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas - will become reality before Bush leaves office in January 2009.

While the Israeli premier has spoken of 'serious progress' in his negotiations with Abbas, begun late last year after a seven-year freeze in the peace process, Palestinian officials have downplayed Olmert's statements, one of whom even called them a 'big lie.'

During his first visit to Israel and the West Bank in January, Bush stated unequivocally that: 'I believe it's going to happen, that there will be a signed peace treaty by the time I leave office.'

This time, although meant largely to honour Israel's 60th anniversary, Bush, wrapping up his 48-hour visit Friday morning, did not mention the peace negotiations in any of his statements.

His national security advisor, Stephen Hadley, did say the parties were making progress. Bush 'thinks it still can be done,' he said of their efforts to reach an agreement by the end of the year.

Not only have ongoing violence in and from Hamas-controlled Gaza, and Israel's refusal to stop building in those settlement blocks it wants to keep 'forever,' marred the revived peace talks, a new police investigation against Olmert threatening his political future has created more uncertainty for the process.

Some five months after the peace talks were revived, the parties now appear to be coming to terms with the possibility that they may not be able to reach a final peace deal before the deadline passes, but an interim, or 'framework' one. Already in February, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Haim Ramon, a close confidante of Olmert's, said he doubted the sides would be able to reach a final peace treaty on time. But he said it was 'possible, not mission impossible' to reach a 'declaration of principles.'

A key advisor to Abbas, Nimr Hammad, said earlier this week that the Palestinians might have to make do with a framework agreement, if a final deal is unreachable by the end of the year, although 'it is not what we want and does not meet our expectations.'

Olmert meanwhile promised Bush Wednesday that he was 'genuinely interested' in meeting the deadline he and Abbas set for themselves in Annapolis, Maryland in November.

Even the 'understanding' that he envisions - whether a framework agrement or a declaration of principles - would deal with key core issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the final border between Israel and the future Palestinian state, security arrangements and the Palestinian refugee problem.

But for the first time, Olmert publicly said that he wants to leave a final settlement on perhaps the most sensitive of the core issues - Jerusalem - out of the understanding, for 'later.'

'We need to reach an understanding ... that will relate to the issue of borders, to the issue of refugees, to the issue of the security arrangements, and will set forth also, at the end of the day, the framework for how to deal later with the issue of Jerusalem,' Olmert said in a joint photo-opportunity with Bush.

Nevertheless, what stood out in Olmert's statements was not what he said, but what he did not say. In a number of instances, he referred to Jerusalem as 'our eternal capital,' rather than 'our eternal, undivided capital.' The latter thus far was the stock phrase used by just about every single Israeli leader, to underscore Israel's claim to the entire city as its capital.

His omission was a clear signal that he is ready to make future compromises on Jerusalem.

Whatever the few hints shedding some light on the negotiations, the truth is, no one knows whether the parties have made some or any progress at all. As they are highly sensitive, the talks are classified and held away from the media glare.

Olmert, under attack and with rock-bottom ratings, has a political interest in portraying the talks as successful. The Palestinians have an interest in downplaying progress, to keep up the pressure on Israel.

Bush, his reputation at stake as the key sponsor, too has an interest in placing a positive spin on the talks.

Only time will tell. In the mean time, the clock is ticking.