Unhappy Anniversary

If one definition of mental illness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results — e.g. “this time the door will break, rather than my head” — than by 2002 American policy in the Middle East had become deeply neurotic.

Administration after administration, Republican and Democratic alike, had attempted to implement the same plan: Make the Israelis again agree to give up land and stop fighting terrorists, then hope the terrorism will stop and the Arab world will accept a Jewish state.

It never happened — not even when, at Camp David in 2000, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak flat-out offered Yasser Arafat an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza. Arafat simply could not declare the war against Israel over; he could not accept the existence of a permanent homeland for the Jewish people in the Middle East.

A year ago today, President Bush recognized that it was time for a new idea and to his great credit he came up with one: His 6/24/02 speech was a dramatic paradigm shift. Speaking over Arafat’s head directly to the Palestinian people, Bush said a choice must be made: You can have terrorism and the dream of destroying Israel, he said. Or you can have independence, security, freedom, and democracy. But you cannot have both. In the aftermath of 9/11, the United States will not help create another corrupt, terrorist-sponsoring dictatorship.

Over the past year, however, Bush’s clear statement of principle and purpose has been muddied by the so-called Quartet — the United Nations, the European Union and Russia collaborating with the US State Department. They came up with a so-called Road Map that is less a guide to achieving Bush’s 6/24/02 vision than a detour back to Oslo, a return to the so-called peace processes that have so disastrously and lethally failed in the past.

Consider the President’s key messages a year ago today, and compare with the reality:

“My vision is two states, living side by side in peace and security.”

That vision is still not shared by any Palestinian leader in the West Bank and Gaza — not even Mahmoud Abbas, the new Palestinian Authority prime minister. None of them is yet willing to say he accepts the permanent existence of Israel as a Jewish state. If they did, they’d have to give up their demand that Israel absorb millions of Palestinians — the so-called Right of Return which would make Jews a minority in the state whose very purpose was to be a Jewish homeland.

“There is simply no way to achieve that peace until all parties fight terror.”

So far, Abbas has made no attempt to fight terror. At most, he’s been willing to talk with terrorist groups about temporary ceasefires that would be to their advantage — it would give them time to regroup and rearm.

“Peace requires a new and different Palestinian leadership, so that a Palestinian state can be born.”

There really is no “new” Palestinian leadership. Mr. Abbas candidly admits that he answers to Mr. Arafat. He has no independent power.

“I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror.”

Mr. Arafat is, of course, deeply compromised by terror. And Mr. Abbas was not actually elected by the Palestinian people.

“A Palestinian state will never be created by terror — it will be built through reform. And reform must be more than cosmetic change, or a veiled attempt to preserve the status quo. True reform will require entirely new political and economic institutions, based on democracy, market economics and action against terrorism.”

There’s been no real reform and, again, no action against terrorist. The status quo has been preserved. Within hours of President Bush’s Middle East meeting with Messrs. Sharon and Abbas, the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade took part in a lethal attack on Israelis. And Al Aksa is, of course, part of Mr. Arafat’s Fatah organization, of which Mr. Abbas also is a senior leader.

“Today, Palestinian authorities are encouraging, not opposing, terrorism. This is unacceptable. And the United States will not support the establishment of a Palestinian state until its leaders engage in a sustained fight against the terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure.”

Mr. Abbas does not publicly encourage terrorism. But, as noted, there has been no sustained fight against terrorist groups, let alone any attempt to dismantle terrorist infrastructures. And Mr. Arafat, continues not only to encourage but also to sponsor terrorism in open alliance with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Incitement continues, too. The official television of the Palestinian Authority still broadcasts music videos encouraging Palestinian children to become suicide bombers. Just last Friday, clerics on the PA’s payroll called for the destruction of the Jews and praised Palestinian mothers for raising their children to kill Jews — as they have most Fridays for years. Under these circumstances, the Quartet’s support for the establishment of a Palestinian state both contradicts and defies President Bush’s clearly articulated policy.

“As new Palestinian institutions and new leaders emerge, demonstrating real performance on security and reform, I expect Israel to respond and work toward a final status agreement.”

Based on Israeli polls, it’s clear that as those institutions and leaders emerge, Israelis will be eager to respond. Mr. Sharon has already shown his good will by releasing prisoners (including mass murderers of Israelis and, by the way, Americans — who have been welcomed as heroes by Mr. Arafat).

“All who are familiar with the history of the Middle East realize that there may be setbacks in this process. Trained and determined killers, as we have seen, want to stop it.”

Surely, the way to eliminate those trained and determined killers is to…well, eliminate them. Yet every time the Israelis attempt to do that the State Department scolds them, arguing that removing terrorists determined to stop the peace process damages the peace process. By what possible logic?

A year ago today, President Bush saw a new way to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was based not on moral equivalence or demands that Israel again trade its scarce land and precarious security for vague promises. It was based on an end to terrorism, on each side accepting the other’s right to exist, and on achieving real freedom for the Palestinians through political and economic liberalization.

A year later, it’s time for the president to insist that those whose paychecks he signs finally put aside the failed policies of the past and pursue his vision instead.

— Clifford D. May, a former New York Timesforeign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and an NRO contributor.