Schlaglicht Israel Nr. 20 Aktuelles aus israelischen Tageszeitungen 29. Oktober – 11. November 2007 1. Annapolis Gipfel Mit dem Nahen der von den USA einberufenen Nahost-Konferenz in Annapolis werden die Diskussionen um das Ziel des Gipfels und seine Erfolgsaussichten hitziger. Es scheint sich abzuzeichnen, dass auf dem Gipfel eine gemeinsame Erklärung unterzeichnet werden wird und ein Prozess zur Lösung der Endstatus-Fragen in Gang gesetzt wird. In einer Ansprache am 4. November erklärte Premierminister Ehud Olmert, Ziel müsse sein, eine Lösung des Konflikts vor Ende der Amtszeit des US-Präsidenten George W. Bush anzustreben. Diese Erklärung wurde von vielen Seiten mit großer Skepsis betrachtet, sind doch die Hindernisse auf dem Weg zu zwei Staaten, die friedlich Seite an Seite miteinander leben, sehr zahlreich. Whose Road Map? "As did his pronouncements last August in Jericho, where Prime Minister Ehud Olmert indicated a willingness to withdraw from an area equivalent to 100% of the occupied territories, his latest declarations to the Saban Forum[…] sounded promising.[…] He expressed the hope that the two­state solution would be achieved before US President George W. Bush's term ends in January 2009. […] In the end, the Palestinians may get 80-90% of the West Bank, but they do not get a viable state. They will have sterile swatches of territory whereas Israel retains control of the borders, movement of people and goods both within the Palestinian state and between it and the countries around, much of the country's arable land, almost all its water, the Palestinians' airspace and even control of their communications. The Palestine state is deprived of a viable economy. Given that 60% of Palestinians are under the age of 18 and that mini-state must absorb hundreds of thousands of refugees, it's prospects for being a viable, stable and truly independent state are nil given the unspoken parameters outlined in the Bush letter. […] The crucial question is: will it be a viable state? If it's true that Olmert intends that Israel permanently retain the settlement blocs, an Israeli"greater" Jerusalem and effective control of the entire country to the Jordan River, then we will merely be substituting a sophisticated form of apartheid for occupation. The devil is in the details." Jeff Halper, JEP, 06.11.2007 Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a Flop "A parallel can be drawn between these days, before the Annapolis summit, and the hours that preceded the decision to embark on the Second Lebanon War. Just like that fateful July 12, 2006, when the government felt it had no choice but to attack Hezbollah, Ehud Olmert is now leading the country to an international meeting in the United States, assuming he has no choice. Just as the abduction of two soldiers drove the prime minister and his colleagues to squeeze the trigger, now the security and political circumstances have set them on a path of no return to Annapolis. The two efforts are very likely to have similar results: bitter disappointment. […] To a certain extent, it appears the same syndrome is leading to the Annapolis conference: It is meant to relieve immediate pressures, lacks any chance of achieving long-term results, and is mostly meant to serve the political needs of some of its main participants. There is one difference between the two events: At Annapolis, the limited result is known in advance, so there are apparently no 1