Washington — Some well-meaning members of Congress believe that President Bush’s “road map” to Middle East peace asks too much of Israel. Judging from a letter they recently signed, they don’t think it goes far enough in pushing the Palestinians to stop terrorism and corruption.

On the other hand, they believe that the Palestinians will be able to accomplish sweeping security, political and economic changes without parallel Israeli cooperation contained in the plan.

What is apparent from these criticisms is that the representatives in question have failed to read the road map. If they had seriously examined the direction that it lays out for ending Israeli-Palestinian violence, they would have learned that their fears are unfounded and that the plan’s call for reciprocal steps toward peace works in Israel’s best interests.

The congressional letter calls for the end of Palestinian terror and violence, the establishment of a new Palestinian leadership with real authority willing to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, true accountability and transparency in Palestinian governance, and an overhaul of the Palestinian security apparatus — all before Israel should be expected to do anything in return.

Yet in the first phase of the plan, the road map clearly calls for Palestinians to declare “an unequivocal end to violence and terrorism and undertake visible efforts on the ground to arrest, disrupt and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning violent attacks on Israelis anywhere.”

It insists on the consolidation of Palestinian security organizations within the context of a U.S. security cooperation plan designed to rebuild and retrain the security services.
These retrained forces will be expected to resume cooperation with their Israeli counterparts, including senior-level meetings with the participation of U.S. security officials.

As Israel withdraws from locations occupied since the outbreak of the intifada, Palestinian security forces will be obligated to re-deploy there.

Under the best of circumstances, these security measures would not be easy for the Palestinians to fulfill. But considering that much of the Palestinian security apparatus in the West Bank has been destroyed, Hamas presents a growing challenge to authority in Gaza, and Palestinian society is undergoing a general collapse as the economic strain and violence of the intifada take their toll, the Palestinians will need considerable cooperation from Israel to get the job done.

No inevitability

As the Palestinians carry out their obligations, the road map calls on Israel to agree to stop deportations, attacks on civilians and the demolition of Palestinian property, gradually return to security cooperation with the Palestinians, and withdraw from the territory it has reoccupied during the intifada.

Given the heavy load that Palestinians are rightfully expected to undertake to improve security for Israel, do the representatives who signed the letter objecting to the road map seriously think these obligations are unreasonable for Israel to perform or that the Palestinians can fulfill their responsibilities without them?

The road map also calls for the Palestinians to tackle significant institutional reforms early on, such as drafting a democratic constitution; appointing an empowered interim prime minister or cabinet; achieving a genuine separation of powers; establishing an independent election commission; meeting established judicial, administrative, and economic benchmarks; and holding free elections.

Again, these are significant reforms, some of which the Palestinians are already trying to carry out.

The road map insists on Israel taking steps at the same time that can help them succeed, such as helping facilitate elections and allowing Palestinians to travel for electoral purposes.

As part of the compromise inherent in the peace process, Israel also will be expected to end settlement expansion and take down illegal settlement outposts, agree to the establishment of a provisional Palestinian state, and negotiate the terms for the creation of a permanent Palestinian state in the plan’s final phase.

But the plan does not make the creation of a Palestinian state inevitable. As the road map states, this is “a performance-based and goal driven” proposition. Yes, there are “clear phases, timelines, target dates and benchmarks” included in the document. But it also says “non-compliance with obligations will impede progress.”

At each phase of the road map, the United States and others must reach consensus on whether to move ahead. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians will be expected to blindly plow forward with the plan if the other side isn’t meeting its responsibilities.

The road map is not a perfect document, but it is far better than supporting policies that are condemning Israel to perpetual conflict and sapping its economic and military strength. Israel would benefit greatly if legislators actually looked at the road map and the direction it provides before dismissing it out of hand.

Mark Rosenbaum is founder and policy director of Americans for Peace Now.