I wanted to wait for a few days before jumping to conclusions about the Annapolis Summit (they seem to have finally stuck to a name). Now that I have had some time to sniff around (i.e. sit in front of the TV flipping between the news networks), I have reached two conclusions and some predictions about the future of this process.

First, I find it amusing that this-and-that pundit from such-and-such think tank hail the attendance of various Arab leaders as a success. This is not a success. The puppet tyrants of the Arab world live to serve their master: Bush (and Syria is no exception). When the White House whistles, the would-be lapdogs come running. This has been true since at least the end of the Cold War… and when it isn’t, the United States launches a war.

Some speculate that the United States has been keen to invite Arab leaders as part of ploy to drum up support against Iran and I tend to think this argument has some truth. Bush certainly is not interested in peace, so we can exclude that variable. (I don’t believe any American President truly has a stake in accomplishing peace despite the high-browed talk of legacies from various “experts”.) The U.S. President is not so stupid to believe he can solve the crisis in one year… (He won’t be able to pronounce Mahmoud Abbas’ name in one year – did you hear his bumbling speech??) But he may be stupid enough to think he can escape the trail of destruction in Iraq for his few remaining months in office.

Second, I have confirmed my disdain for both Ehud Olmert and Abu Mazen. Olmert treats Abu Mazen like a child – just watch his behavior around the guy. It seems he almost has to restrain himself from pinching Abu Mazen’s cheeks. And just what do they talk about every five minutes when they grab each others arms and stare into each others eyes? I could have sworn I heard Olmert say “Thaaaaaat’s a good boy…” but I’m not entirely sure. I suppose Abu Mazen is more cuddly than Mohammed Dahlan, whom some are saying is actually in Annapolis on Bush’s request (I’m serious, Dahlan may actually be there).

Now for some predictions: I don’t see this process going anywhere. Talk of peace is hypocritical as long as Israel continues to occupy 100% of Palestinian lands. It seems this process will simply confirm Israel’s proud tradition of trying to force through a deal on its own terms while avoiding international law and subsequently claiming it’s offer was “generous”.

For this particular conference, however, the standards of success were placed so ridiculously low, it was bound to succeed as long as Bush managed to avoid referring to Abbas as “Abu Grumpy”.

Measured against the low expectations deliberately fostered by the US administration, Annapolis is being seen as a modest success, above all thanks to the long-delayed joint Palestinian-Israeli declaration. <<< more

Moreover, I am sick of hearing the news report (even al-Jazeera is bad about this) that Hamas and Iran “were absent” from the conference as if they tossed their invitations in the bin. It would be more accurate to say Hamas and Iran “were not invited” to the conference.

Certainly Iran was never going to have been invited if the meeting was motivated at all by Iran’s isolation, but Hamas is the elected leadership of Palestine (like it or not) and should have been represented in some way. No peace can be negotiated as long as Israel and Gaza remain in a state of war… but neither Olmert nor Abbas seem to recognize this. In fact, from my understanding of the situation, I blame Salam Fayyed and the other incompetent puppets in Ramallah for their short-sighted, tacit support for the siege on Gaza. PA Cabinet Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh (not the brightest guy) recently said to a friend of mine during a teleconference, “We want to teach Hamas a lesson.” Fine, but with Hamas and Fatah each taking care of their own in this way, the ordinary people in Gaza are the ones who suffer the consequences of this “lesson”. Because of this, the siege is dividing Palestinian society even more by forcing independents to take sides. People are now wistfully talking of the apparent Palestinian “disengagement” from Gaza… Even Hanan Ashrawi, for whom I previously had a great deal of respect, is handicapped by her ideological blinders. I won’t repeat what she said to at the teleconference, but it was so appallingly opportunistic and anti-Gazan I would have expected it to come from the mouth of Ariel Sharon and not a prominent Palestinian intellectual.

That said, my primary prediction is this: The incompetence in Ramallah and the Palestinian leadership’s complicity in the siege on Gaza only plays into Israel’s hands. These people are reinforcing their own weakness and it is so frustrating to witness the possibility of Palestinian statehood disappear with significant help from the PA.