And now the fence is embraced by the left?

Even by phone from Ramallah, one could hear the amazement in Kadoura Fares's voice. Like many of the leaders of Fatah, Fares is currently busy with the political battles over the formation of a new Palestinian government, and had not heard that some of his comrades from the Geneva Initiative have become enthusiastic supporters and defenders of the new fence route approved by the cabinet at the start of the week.

The entire Palestinian leadership, from Mahmoud Abbas on down, lambasted the route, which transfers some 7 percent of the West Bank to the "Israeli" side of the fence. The denunciations voiced by Fares - who, despite his close friendship with Marwan Barghouti, supported Mahmoud Abbas from day one - are hardly exceptional.

"I expect the Israeli members of the Geneva Initiative to honor what we agreed on - the Green Line," declared the man who was one of the Palestinian stars of the initiative's publicity campaign in Israel. "Any move eastward of the Green Line means that those who are talking about peace are not serious, they do not believe in two states."

According to Fares, the changes made in the new route compared to the previous route are "meaningless changes. You don't measure such things by the meter."

Granted, the route has changed. Some of the enclaves that would have imprisoned tens of thousands of Palestinians between the Green Line and the fence have been eliminated. That is a change with great significance. Around Jerusalem, Gush Etzion and Rosh Ha'ayin, the fence was moved a kilometer or two closer to the Green Line, so more Palestinian farmers will be able to reach their olive groves. That is also not a negligible achievement. And while the fence connecting Ariel and Kedumim to Israel - a tongue that would extend more than 20 kilometers into the West Bank - has not been canceled, for now, it will not be built.

All this happened in large measure because of the International Court of Justice in The Hague (especially with regard to the enclaves), the Americans (especially with regard to Ariel) and the High Court of Justice (with regard to the new route around Jerusalem and Gush Etzion). The nonviolent demonstrations held by residents of Palestinian villages, joined by a few (too few) Israeli leftists also contributed. The fact that former army officers such as Colonel (reserve) Shaul Arieli and other members of the Council for Peace and Security joined the petition against the fence's original route also played a significant role, especially as they were able to propose an alternative route with "security" credentials to the High Court.

Yet despite all the changes, it is not hard to understand why Kadoura Fares and Abu Mazen are saying what they are. It is not just the fact that some enclaves will remain, for instance in Bir Naballah, and perhaps also around Bethlehem; the latter is still unclear. Nor is it just the fact that the fence around Ma'aleh Adumim creates a 15 by 20 kilometer "balloon" that will cut the southern part of the West Bank off from the northern part, or that the new route will definitively separate West Bank residents from their religious, cultural and administrative capital, East Jerusalem, with its 250,000 Palestinian residents.

It is not even the fact that the Israel Defense Forces will remain on both sides of the fence, or that the Jordan Valley and that portion of the Judean Desert that is in the West Bank - which together constitute about 30 percent of its territory - will remain on the Israeli side. The real problem is that, once again, the Israelis are deciding for the Palestinians what is best for them: where their (underground) roads will run, where their patchwork state will end.

That Ariel Sharon supports this route is no surprise. His philosophy has always been, as it is with regard to the disengagement plan, that Israel must decide what is good for it, and if that is not good for the Palestinians - too bad.

It is also no surprise that politicians such as Haim Ramon, who has long supported this route, are presenting the decision as a victory for their position. But what happened to the more moderate members of the Labor Party, such as Ophir Pines-Paz or Amram Mitzna, who in the not-so-distant past were talking about negotiations with the Palestinians? What happened to the signatories of the Geneva Initiative, who made an agreement with the Palestinians their banner? Shaul Arieli, who - according to Aluf Benn's report in Haaretz - drafted the maps for Geneva, even came to a meeting of the Labor Party ministers to persuade them to support the new route.

"There is someone to talk with," proclaims the Geneva Initiative's advertising slogan, while showing the faces of Fares, Yasser Abed Rabbo and other Palestinian leaders. Is what the Geneva signatories really mean by this slogan that Ramon should talk with Sharon, and Shimon Peres with Ehud Olmert? All that will be left for the Palestinians to do is sign, drink the waters of Gaza and eat the dust that will be raised by the wall at Qalandiyah.

	The fence at Abu Dis: "I expect the Israeli members of the Geneva Initiative to honor what we agreed on - the Green Line," says Kadoura Fares.
	Photo by: Tomer Appelbaum / Ba