Amid scepticism, Bush begins his visit to West Asia

Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Shimon Peres greeted Bush during a ceremonial arrival at Ben-Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv, with Olmert telling him he had “the love and admiration of all the citizens of Israel”.

But Bush, making his first visit to Israel as President, almost immediately found himself confronted with the political and diplomatic controversies that have thwarted previous efforts to forge a Palestinian-Israeli peace.

A sign in a field, visible from his helicopter during the quick flight to Jerusalem, declared, “Hands off Jerusalem”, the city whose ultimate status remains among the most difficult issues dividing Israelis and Palestinians. A new barrage of rockets landed in Israel from the Gaza Strip. And Israeli settlers began erecting new outposts on Palestinian lands before dawn in Hebron.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also stirred controversy in remarks made to reporters on the eve of Bush’s visit and published here on Wednesday in which she suggested that the US opposed any Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories, including those in Har Homa.

Official American policy has been deliberately ambiguous on the matter. Officials traveling with Bush declined to clarify whether Rice’s remarks reflected a shift in American policy or were intended to press the Israelis as part of the peace effort.

Israel’s decision in December to authorise 300 new homes in Har Homa infuriated Palestinians, who said it showed that Israel was not serious about commitments it made at the Annapolis conference.

Israel annexed East Jerusalem and expanded the city’s boundaries after the 1967 war and considers areas like Har Homa to be part of Israel. The US does not recognise the annexation.

“The important point here is that one reason that we need to have an agreement is that we can stop having this discussion about what belongs in Israel and what doesn’t,” Rice said in a roundtable interview with journalists from the region.

She added that there had been “important changes since the ‘49 armistice and since the events of ‘67... And those are going to have to be accommodated in an agreement”.

... contd.