In both France and the Middle East yesterday, there was a sense of new -- but still fragile -- beginnings.
In Paris, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- who after the transatlantic rift over the Iraq war had spoken of punishing France for its opposition -- delivered a speech designed to move beyond the wounds of that dispute and renew the sense of common purpose between the United States and Europe.
 
Friday's Question:
| | |
|
In Egypt, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas held a summit in which they announced mutual agreements to stop violent operations between their countries, giving new hope that the peace process could begin again after four bloody years.
The two moments are linked because the Bush administration has pledged a renewed commitment to diplomacy in the Middle East, in part to placate European allies. Many have large Muslim populations, and European officials have criticized President Bush as being too disengaged during his first term. Rice scheduled a 24-hour stop in Israel and the West Bank in the middle of her seven-day tour so she could tell European officials that the United States once again is nurturing the peace process.
But yesterday's expressions of good faith are merely words that can be quickly buried by the animosities of old disputes. The Bush administration still faces challenges in building momentum with European allies, and Israeli and Palestinian leaders also have no illusions about the tough road ahead.
Ten cease-fires, for instance, have failed between the Israelis and Palestinians, mostly notably in 2003, when Sharon and Abbas held a similar summit with Bush presiding. Only the absence of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat gives hope that this cease-fire has a somewhat better chance.
While Rice spoke eloquently about a common purpose between Europe and the United States, she skipped lightly over -- or ignored -- the many issues that still divide the continents, such as disputes over the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto treaty on global warming and, most notably, how to handle the nuclear threat posed by Iran.
Britain, France and Germany have been negotiating with the Iranians, but the Bush administration has refused to join the talks. All week, Rice has flirted with the question of whether the administration favors "regime change" in Iran -- a stance that would alarm Europeans. Former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage told Congress in 2003 that the administration did not support regime change in Iran. But asked point-blank several times during her travels whether the administration now favors such change, Rice never answered yes or no. "The policy of the United States is to deal with both the external and internal behavior of an Iranian regime that is out of step with where the Middle East is going," she said.
In her speech, Rice offered no apology for the administration's actions and stressed that Europe should join the United States in the fight for freedom around the world. Taken on its face, the language might have been interpreted as a demand that Europe look at the world as the United States does. But the message was softened by Rice's style -- and her decision to give the speech in France, the hub of anti-Bush feeling in Europe.
"There was no change in substance, but there was a change in style -- and style can lead to substance," said a European diplomat who watched the speech.
On the Middle East, for the moment, the United States and Europe are united in trying to build up Palestinian institutions and to assist in a coordinated departure from the Gaza Strip by the Israelis.
After Arafat's death, many European officials pressed for an immediate effort to have full-scale peace talks. But the United States made the case that the parties must first build trust among themselves. The British, for instance, had promoted the idea of an early peace conference, but that has been downgraded to a conference next month on Palestinian reform -- without the Israelis in attendance.
During her brief stop in Israel, Rice named a coordinator to monitor Palestinian efforts to restructure its security forces, but she said he will have no role in political issues, a position that falls short of the European desire for a full-time special envoy. "The U.S. administration is making it clear that it is there to assist and accompany, but that it is standing on the sidelines and not on the playing field itself," an analysis in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz said yesterday.
But Europeans say they will press anew for more engagement in the Middle East -- such as an envoy and a peace conference -- if Sharon succeeds in withdrawing from Gaza and four settlements on the West Bank later this year. That stance could quickly collide with the administration's more cautious approach and once again increase U.S.-European tensions.
