Quartet envoy: Israel acting as if disengagement never happened

[bemildred]

James Wolfensohn, the Quartet's special envoy for the disengagement, has criticized Israel for holding up agreements on opening Gaza Strip border crossings to the passage of people and goods and on improving Palestinian mobility in the West Bank.

In a letter sent last week to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and the foreign ministries of Britain, Russia and the United States, Wolfensohn wrote: "The Government of Israel, with its important security concerns, is loath to relinquish control, almost acting as though there has been no withdrawal, delaying making difficult decisions and preferring to take difficult matters back into slow-moving subcommittees."

Accompanying the letter, which was dated October 16, was a report written on October 17 regarding Wolfensohn's latest visit, from October 7-12. The introduction to the report stated: "The Special Envoy was disappointed that none of the key movement issues has been resolved. Without a dramatic improvement in Palestinian movement and access, within appropriate security arrangements for Israel, the economic revival essential to a resolution of the conflict will not be possible."

Haaretz

[Englander]

1. Haaratz editorial - Lift the siege of Gaza

'Supporters of disengagement in Israel and around the world feel cheated. After the determined and sensitive withdrawal from the Gush Katif settlements, the government of Israel is avoiding the necessary follow-up steps, and is imposing a choking air, sea and land blockade against the Gaza Strip's residents.

This complaint has been voiced not only by the Palestinians, but also by James Wolfensohn, the Quartet's envoy for disengagement, in a letter last week to the Quartet's foreign ministers and the United Nations secretary-general.

Wolfensohn warned that the government of Israel was preventing the economic recovery of Gaza's population by referring the most urgent matters to committees that work unreasonably slowly. Whether this is being done maliciously, because of turf wars, or whether it is merely ordinary foot-dragging, the result is the same. The agreements involving the opening of the Gaza Strip crossings to people and goods, which are the cornerstone of Gaza's economy, have been delayed for too long. The proposal by the World Bank to implement a temporary system of convoys to ferry merchandise has not been implemented, and even discussion of it has been repeatedly put off. Israel has not responded to a proposal by the European Union to temporarily monitor the Rafah crossing; the Erez roadblock is almost hermetically sealed; the passage of goods through Karni is especially slow; and there are only two or three buses between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank once every few days. This situation has nothing to do with security, the meticulous protection of which is obvious.

Wolfensohn's letter took a dramatic tone, intended to wake the decision-makers from their apathy, warning that "if we miss this opportunity for change, we will regret it for the next decade."

More at;
Haaratz

[Violet_Crumble]

2. His words are at odds with some comments I've read in this forum...

Wolfenshohn is saying that the Israeli govt holds some responsibility for improving movement at border crossings, and the govt official quoted at the end of the article appears to agree with that call. Yet I've seen comments in other threads here that seem to be saying that now the disengagement has happened, Israel has done it's bit and has no responsibility at all, and it's all up to the Palestinians, and if they fail, it shows they don't want a resolution to the conflict. What's being said in the letter is pretty fair from what I can see...

Violet...

[bemildred]

3. It seems to be a contentious issue.

I have a feeling that the US government and GOI are
actually at odds somewhat over Gaza, as opposed to
posturing like there is some dispute, but I've not
seen a coherent explanation for that, and US foreign
policy is in such chaos that it's hard to "reason"
about what is going on. This shows up in the argument
over the West Bank expansion Jabba is doing too.

The one thing that comes to mind is Shrub badly needs
a foreign policy win, and some sort of progress in the
I/P situation, as opposed to the current pernicious
bullshit offensive, would fill the bill, and is more
feasible than fixing Iraq say. Abbas would certainly
cooperate - within certain limits - if given the chance.

There are other more speculative issues, but the point
is that there seems to be some real conflict of interest.
It seems certain that having the intifada heat up again
is not going to make the Bushites happy at all, we are
supposed to be putting the finishing touches on the
"Palestinian State" at this point.