A vision, not a plan.

Byline: The Register-Guard

One man did not bring the Middle East to its current bloody stalemate, and getting rid of one man won't cause a democratic Palestinian state to flourish alongside a peaceful Israel. In his speech Monday President George Bush put too much emphasis on removing Yasser Arafat as head of the Palestinian Authority, and not enough on what Israelis and Palestinians alike must do to break the cycle of violence and retaliation.

Bush put the United States on record more firmly than ever before in support of a Palestinian state - but not until Palestinians choose new leaders, adopt a new constitution, elect a legislature with meaningful powers, establish an independent judiciary and create "new political and economic institutions based on democracy, market economics and action against terrorism."

That's a tall order for 4.5 million people living in what Bush called "squalor and occupation." Many Palestinians undoubtedly hope to create the kind of nation the president described, but suspect that their efforts will always somehow fall short of the ideal that Bush has set forth. And as long as Palestinians fail to meet those conditions, they will never trigger the response Bush demanded from Israel: an end to the occupation and a withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Bush believes that removing Arafat is a necessary first step toward fulfillment of his vision of two states living in peace. When he last spoke on Middle Eastern affairs, on April 4, he said Palestinian leaders had not "consistently opposed or confronted terrorists." On Monday he said "Palestinian authorities are encouraging, not opposing, terrorism." The United States will not support a Palestinian state until Palestinians leaders "engage in a sustained fight" against terrorism, the president said.

Yet it's not clear that a new Palestinian leader would be more willing or able than Arafat to stop terrorism against Israel. The suicide bombers and their supporting organizations do not share even Arafat's wavering commitment to accommodation with Israel. These organizations claim the loyalty of many Palestinians, and their popularity rises as the prospects of independence and an end to occupation recede. If Arafat is replaced, it might not be long before the United States and Israel began to miss him.

Rather than focusing on a single leader, Bush should have called upon Palestinians and Israelis alike to address the conditions that feed violence and radicalism in the region. One such condition is the conviction throughout the Arab world that the United States lacks credibility because of its unswerving support of Israel - a feeling the president's speech will do little to alter. That perception sharpens the sense of powerlessness that forms an important part of the rationale for terrorism.

Bush should have balanced his calls for new Palestinian leadership with a demand that Israel allow a functioning, self-governing society to emerge in the occupied territories. Instead, on the day of Bush's speech Israel sent troops into the seventh of eight major Palestinian cities. This imbalance is unlikely to produce Palestinian leaders of the type Bush would like to see.

The president also needs to clarify what will happen during the next six months. Bush's dismissal of Arafat as a relevant factor in a future Palestinian state leaves a power vacuum in the occupied territories - a vacuum that radical groups may rush to fill. This, in turn, will embolden elements in Israel's government that with to extend the occupation indefinitely. Some concrete confidence-building steps are needed immediately.

It is helpful to have the president clearly articulate the vision of separate Palestinian and Israeli states. The vision is widely accepted - including by the Arab League - but is opposed by extremists in Israel and the occupied territories. The region needs a plan for moving beyond their obstructionism. Bush has not offered one. His speech described the right destination, but did not tell how to get there.