The last two months have noticeably seen the emergence of a new trend in Israeli politics take shape. Writing peace plans has become a hobby of sorts for the various political parties and lobbyists in Israel. In fact so many have been proposed it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep count. The peace plans on offer these days include the Nusseibeh-Ayalon Initiative, the Geneva Accord, the Sharon Plan and the latest addition which can be best described as the Settler’s plan, meanwhile the road map lurks in the background.

Perhaps the value of drafting peace plans can be found in the exercise itself. Yet the Sharon Plan and the settler’s plan seem to defeat this possibility since they negate the necessary rules that justify the value of the exercise. Namely, a peace plan should be diplomatic and multilateral in nature offering a route of negotiation between the conflicting parties based on equity that sees them both make compromises and concessions towards a final resolution. A peace plan between two conflicting parties should not be forcefully imposed by the stronger party.

The mounting internal criticism and pressure on Sharon from the likes of his chief of staff, former directors of Israel's Shin Bet security service and the mobilizing Left parties coupled with a $290 million cut in loan guarantees to Israel and the harsh criticism by President Bush of Israel’s continued settlement and Wall construction have forced Sharon to show some diplomatic initiative. To alleviate his qualms, Sharon devised his very own alternative peace plan. Under the Sharon Plan, Israel would set borders for a Palestinian state, as delineated by the Separation Wall now being built, and dismantle small illegal settlements that are isolated and deemed too difficult to defend by mid-2004. Once the Palestinians are caged behind the unilaterally imposed borders, Israel would withdraw from the encompassed Palestinian cities.

Sharon’s plan not only confirms that the Separation Wall is not being built for ‘security’ purposes only, vindicating all those who feared Israel was establishing de facto borders, it also shows how the ruling coalition in the Israeli government has no intention of dismantling any settlements as the plan drew cries of outrage from Sharon’s own Likud party. In a closed meeting of the Likud faction on Monday, Sharon’s plan was vigorously attacked with many calling on Sharon to explicitly deny his plan. The powerful settler’s Yesha Council lobby vowed to prevent any action aimed at evacuating settlements and their chairman Yehiel Hazan, a member of parliament and the Likud party, announced that he presented a draft bill that would demand a majority of 80 members of parliament in order to evacuate settlements.

Not content with simply opposing Sharon’s plan, Israeli right-wing members of parliament and settlers’ groups wanted to jump on the bandwagon and draft their own ‘peace’ plan to counter any plan that opened the possibility of handing the Palestinians control of land in the West Bank. The Settler Plan, as it is tentatively referred to, would involve "the eradication of terrorism, the abandonment of the principle of peace in exchange for land, autonomous administration for the Arabs and a final regional accord which would exclude the creation of a Palestinian state or the dismantling of settlements," according to Ben Tzvi Lieberman, a senior member of the Settlers' Council. Moreover, the Settler Plan would replace the Palestinian Authority with a series of self-administered "regional authorities” and would permanently annex the West Bank.

As news circulates that the opposition Labor Party is putting together its own plan that would include an Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza, it is clear that Israeli parties are captivated by writing ‘peace plans.’ Yet the reason for writing the peace plans ironically does not seem to be to achieve peace. Israeli parties and politicians are drafting peace plans for several reasons including to divert political pressure, to procrastinate and thereby maintain that status quo and to ensure their survival within Israel’s political establishment, since the current trend suggests that without a peace plan they will be sidelined and left out of the loop. Sadly the word ‘peace’ seems to have nothing to do with their plans.