After the comments last week by Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman which referenced the Roadmap for Two States and the Annapolis Declaration, there was a lot of talk about what these two documents are all about. And while these two plans for Israeli-Palestinian peace have the same goal of a two-state solution, they go about achieving those aims through very different methods. We present below a short discussion of both plans to aid in understanding the situation.
The Roadmap for Two States was presented by President George W. Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Chairman Yasser Arafat in April of 2003, and the Israeli Government subsequently adopted the document with a number of reservations. Basically, the document envisioned a bottom-up peace process taking place step-by-step in three stages:
- Addressing Israeli security demands (namely that Palestinians would end terrorism and incitement against Israel) and the Palestinian desire for a freeze on settlement building
- Establishing a Palestinian state with temporary boundaries
- Negotiating the “core issues” and Arab recognition of the State of Israel. (Note that negotiations would only begin in the third stage.)
The Annapolis Declaration was the result of a November 2007 summit, and functions as an addendum to the Roadmap. Essentially, it envisions a top-down process, in which negotiating on the “core issues” would begin immediately (Roadmap Stage 3) and reaching the agreement that would be shelved until such time as the Palestinians can rein in terrorism (Roadmap Stage 1). At that future date, the agreement reached would be implemented in full. While Prime Minister Olmert reported to the government on the Declaration, the government was never asked to approve its guidelines.
Note that the result of both the original Roadmap and the modifications introduced by the Annapolis Summit have the same end in mind: a Palestinian state beside the State of Israel.
For more information, please see the table by Itamar Eichner from Yedioth Aharonoth, 07 April 2009.
Like
