** British Mideast Expert : 'US, Britain, Heading to Disaster'
Agence France Presse.

** Angry Arabs Say Baghdad Market Blast U.S. Massacre
By Miral Fahmy, Reuters.

** UN accuses Israel of illegal land grab.

Tarek William Saab: Incursión en Irak forma parte de una guerra de colonización

Por: Venpres
Publicado: 30/03/03


	imprímelo

	mándaselo a tus panas

Caracas, 29 Mar. Venpres (Analy Ugas).- Como "crimen de guerra" calificó el diputado a la Asamblea Nacional por el Movimiento Quinta República, Tarek William Saab, los ataques de Estados Unidos y Gran Bretaña a Irak y agregó que quienes promovieron estos hechos "tienen que ser enjuiciados en la Corte Penal Internacional".

El parlamentario emeverrista dijo que la guerra por el petróleo es un "genocidio", y resaltó la desventaja en la cual se encuentra esa población. "Irak es un pueblo diezmado por el hambre, el bloqueo, embargo y la mayor tasa de mortalidad infantil del mundo (desde el año 91 de cada 8 iraquíes que nacen uno muere antes de los 5 años), además de ser el país con mayor incidencia de cáncer más grande del mundo, producto de las bombas quedaron prendadas de uranio en el año 91."

Recordó que la Asamblea Nacional de Venezuela fue la primera institución en pronunciarse en contra de la invasión a Irak, "con los votos negativos de la oposición...ellos que hablan de búsqueda de paz están a favor de esa guerra y masacre, aún cuando las mayorías en Venezuela y el mundo la rechazan".

Enfatizó que la agresión armada al pueblo iraquí, "se ha hecho en contra de las voces de millones de seres humanos del planeta, sus jefes de Estado y de Gobierno."

Por otra parte, el diputado Saab calificó como "guerra de colonización" a las incursiones militares iniciadas por los Estados Unidos y condenó las acciones llevadas a cabo por las autoridades del país norteamericano, en las cuales hicieron prisioneros "de manera ilegal a miles de personas, entre ellos dos premios Nóbel de la Paz, detenidos y esposados en Washington, al igual que un obispo".

Apoyó el impulso de los venezolanos, quienes se unen a esta iniciativa mundial contra la guerra por el petróleo e hizo un llamado a los organismos internacionales para que actúen a favor de la paz."Queremos que se movilice no sólo el pueblo de Venezuela, América Latina y del mundo, sino que las Naciones Unidas cumplan con su rol."

Las declaraciones las ofreció el diputado Tarek William Saab en el marco de una jornada por la paz que se realizó en la Plaza de los Museos en horas de la tarde de este sábado, la cual fue organizada por diversos sectores de la sociedad civil y que continuará durante toda la semana entrante, con otras actividades.
http://www.aporrea.net/dameverbo.php?docid=5918
************************************************************************************************************************30 30 de marzo del 2003 EE.UU. busca extender la guerra en América del Sur

Marcelo Larrea
Adital

La orientación belicista de EE.UU., en lo que consideran despectivamente su patio trasero, no descansa estos días en los que el Pentágono está concentrado en la ofensiva militar contra Irak. Hoy el Jefe del Comando Sur, James Hill, se reúne en Miami con los máximos jefes de las fuerzas armadas de Ecuador y Colombia, Oswaldo Jarrín y Jorge Enrique Mora, para insistir en su demanda de regionalizar el Plan Colombia.

A sólo 8 días de su visita a Ecuador, en la que promovió una activa participación del país en la estrategia militar de EE.UU. en América del Sur, James Hill, pretende en está reunión imponer el Plan de Actividades propuesto por el Pentágono. Su contenido específico no se ha hecho público, excepto que se trata de una cooperación para enfrentar amenazas comunes: " la lucha contra el narcoterrorismo y la protección de las fronteras de los países afectados", y que "los generales no recibirán información acerca de qué tipo de ayuda recibirán", como lo explicó Raúl Duany, portavoz del Comando Sur.

El Pentágono busca que Ecuador cierre su frontera con Colombia, para bloquear la que ellos consideran es una fuente de abastecimientos de las FARC, en su propósito de asfixiar a la guerrilla. Pero una decisión de este género, a más de contener un acto de intervención en un conflicto interno de un país soberano, por orden de una potencia extranjera, afectaría severamente el comercio entre las dos repúblicas, una parte significativa de la economía de sus poblaciones fronterizas.

Washington, viene impulsando desde el inicio de su Plan Colombia, la concentración de miles de soldados ecuatorianos con una considerable capacidad de fuego en esa línea fronteriza, para impedir no sólo lo que podrían ser incursiones eventuales, sino fundamentalmente para cercar a las FARC. Las consecuencias de la aplicación de esta exigencia, contienen el relevo de Colombia de su responsabilidad de cuidar sus propias fronteras y la transferencia de ésta tarea que, no es de su competencia, el ejército ecuatoriano, con todos los costos humanos y económicos que pueda implicar. A lo que se suma, el riesgo de que Ecuador participe militarmente en el conflicto, apenas se desaten enfrentamientos armados como los promovidos por los paramilitares en la frontera sur de Venezuela, donde han muerto campesinos venezolanos masacrados por la Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC), que han amenazado con quedarse en territorio de ese país, en un acto de clara provocación a Caracas, dirigido a incluir militarmente a Venezuela en el conflicto.

EE.UU. demanda también la protección del Convenio que le cedió la Base de Manta, donde instaló un denominado Centro de Operaciones de Avanzada (FOL), el cual ya se encuentra operativo al 100% y ha registrado en el último año, 1.028 vuelos hacia la región. El Convenio está denunciado por haber sido suscrito sin observar las normas constitucionales del Ecuador y por su violación por EE.UU., al entregar su manejo logístico a la cuestionada empresa Dyn Corp, acusada de actividades criminales en Yugoslavia y de narcotráfico en Colombia.

La violación de EE.UU. de todas las normas internacionales en la guerra que hoy desarrolla contra Irak y los crímenes que está cometiendo en su ofensiva, subrayan el peligro que se cierne sobre Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Brasil y América del Sur en su conjunto, atrás de la determinación del Jefe del Comando Sur, James Hill, de regionalizar el Plan Colombia.

* Marcelo Larrea es Director del periódico "El Sucre"

http://www.rebelion.org/internacional/030330larrea.htm

*****************************************************************************************************

Blood and Bandages for the Innocent, Tears for the Dead
Robert Fisk, The Independent
30/03/03.

British Mideast Expert : 'US, Britain, Heading to Disaster'
Agence France Presse

CAIRO - Washington and London "have lost the war politically" and their campaign in Iraq is "heading to a disaster", British Middle East expert and journalist Patrick Seale wrote in an article published yesterday.

"Whatever the military outcome of the battle of Baghdad, the Americans and the British have lost the war politically and morally," he said in an opinion column in the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper.

"The invasion has not filled the hearts (of the Iraqis) with joy ... the US and the British forces are now facing the nightmare o f urban warfare," he added in the article entitled "US, Britain heading to disaster."

"As they prepare to attack Baghdad, military planners are surely asking: would it be possible to capture the city at a reasonable cost in US and British lives," he said.

Seale also mentioned the "pressure exerted" on the coalition by "the humanitarian crisis" that threatens the 25-million population, and by the high numbers of expected civilian casualties.

"Whatever the result, the Iraqis are the focus of Arab admiration," said Seale, referring to the stiff resistance shown in the face of the US-led force, despite 12 years of "harsh international sanctions."

He said the war has led to "a dangerously widening gap between Gulf governments that are loyal to the United States and the broader Islamic and Arab nationalist current."

"The governments in Egypt and Jordan, torn between their loyalty to the United States and the anger of their public opinion against war, have started to fear."

Seale charged the United States with "deceitful propaganda" to justify the war, saying Washington has not proved its accusations that Baghdad was developing weapons of mass destruction and had links to terrorist groups.

"The real target of the war is to make US supremacy prevail on a strategic oil-rich region, and to protect Israel's regional superiority and its monopoly over weapons of mass destruction" in the Middle East, he alleged.

Seale, known for his biography of the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, criticised British Prime Minister Tony Blair who, despite his full backing for United States, has not been able to get Washington to agree on a prominent role for the United Nations in reconstructing Iraq.

"Blair tried to build a bridge between Europe and the United States. The bridge crumbled when buildings in Baghdad collapsed. It is the worst diplomatic defeat for British diplomacy in modern history," he said.

LONDON, Mar 29 (IPS) - Labour Party MP Tam Dalyell, revered as the 'father' of the British Parliament, sees catastrophic times ahead if the war on Iraq continues.

”God only knows how this will end,” Dalyell told IPS in an interview Saturday. ”But if it must be ended sensibly, ”I can only say that there should be a ceasefire forthwith that is mandated and administered by the UN. It is clear already that this talk of achieving a regime change is fanciful.”

Dalyell said: ”They have not just miscalculated, they have completely misunderstood the nature of Iraqi society and its institutions.”

Tam Dalyell, who is known as the Father of the House because he is the longest serving MP (he was elected first in 1962), carries considerable weight in Parliament and in the public. He has led a loud campaign since the build-up to the war that the government is deceiving the people.

Dalyell, who has been closely monitoring the situation in Iraq, said most people could see what the U.S. and British governments could not.

”When I was in Baghdad in 1994, a lot of people were very critical of Saddam Hussein and the Ba'ath party,” he said. ”When I went back in 1998, there was far less criticism of Saddam Hussein. The effect of the bombing and the sanctionshad begun to tell. I must add that I went on my own expense, and I was not beholden to anyone.”

The U.S.-British alliance lost their cause when the war began, he said. ”Within the first night, the bombing blitz on Baghdad would have united most Iraqis against the U.S. and Britain,” he said. ”So there is first a misunderstanding about the nature of Iraqi society, and then a total miscalculation about fighting the Iraqi people - and they are now fighting the Iraqis, not Saddam Hussein.”

The blunder has happened because ”people like U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Vice-President Dick Cheny and Rumsfeld's deputy Paul Wolfowitz have hijacked the U.S. government.”

They have been backed by British Prime Minister Tony Blair because ”he is a great believer in bombing,” Dalyell said. ”He likes the idea of being a great war leader.”

Among other consequences, ”British relations with France and Germany are at present sub-zero, and I do not know how they can be put right without at least a change of Prime Minister.” A demand for that change is beginning to grow within Labour, he said.

”There is also great consternation within the Labour Party,” Dalyell said. Of the 410 Labour MPs, 140 voted against the government move to back the war. At the same time, Labour MPs also feel the need to back British troops, he said.

Dalyell, who served in a tank regiment himself for two years, says ”my heart goes out to the soldiers.” He said leaders have no idea what it is like to wear a tank suit, no idea how hot Iraq can be even in the early summer. ”It was 80 degrees when I used to wear tank suits in the Rhine Valley in Germany,” he said. ”And that is nothing like Basra.”

Just the heat in Iraq can become a major problem, he said. ”Napoleon and Hitler perished in the snow before Moscow,” he said. ”I think the allied armies will be frizzled by the sun on the gates of Baghdad.”

The blunders have been covered by a litany of lies in the build-up to the war, Dalyell said. There is little that the British government is saying that can be believed, he said.

”In the dossier on Iraq released by the British government late last year, there is a long passage about the Iraqi football team having the soles of their feet beaten for losing a qualifying match in 1997 for the world cup football,” he said.

”I had checked with FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) at that time. They had said they sent the chairmen of the football associations of Malaysia and Qatar to Iraq for an inquiry, along with an experienced doctor. The members of the team showed no scars and dismissed the allegations. The football officials said there was no truth in those allegations. But why has the British government brought those allegations into a dossier in late 2002?”

The blunder over the passages plagiarised from a Californian research student that found their way into the British dossier are well known, he said. Apart from the nature of the source, ”if someone in a university had done that, they would have been dismissed.”

The dossier had spoken of uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger, Dalyell said. But International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohammed ElBaradei had established that those allegations were nonsense, he said.

He quoted ElBaradei as saying: ”Based on thorough analysis, the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents - which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger - are in fact not authentic.”

Dalyell said in Parliament: ”This is a matter of trust and deceit - Parliament has been deceived. The British people have been deceived ... on a matter which is the basis of peace and war.” Britain, he warned earlier, is on ”a motorway without exit to war”. He was ordered out of the chamber when he refused to sit down and give up.

This is not the first time Dalyell has challenged a British government over warlike moves. Twenty years ago he accused Margaret Thatcher of ”lying” to the Commons during the Falklands War over the sinking of the Argentinean ship, the General Belgrano. He maintained that the act of sinking the ship was illegal. He relentlessly opposed the Falklands war.

**************************************************************************************************************************

Editor's Note: The following is a copy of Mary Wright's letter of resignation to Secretary of State Colin Powell. Wright was most recently the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. She helped open the U.S. embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, in January 2002. Yet another diplomat has quit over Iraq.

When I last saw you in Kabul in January, 2002 you arrived to officially open the US Embassy that I had helped reestablish in December, 2001 as the first political officer. At that time I could not have imagined that I would be writing a year later to resign from the Foreign Service because of US policies. All my adult life I have been in service to the United States. I have been a diplomat for fifteen years and the Deputy Chief of Mission in our Embassies in Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan (briefly) and Mongolia. I have also had assignments in Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Grenada and Nicaragua. I received the State
Department's Award for Heroism as Charge d'Affaires during the evacuation of Sierra Leone in 1997. I was 26 years in the US Army/Army Reserves and participated in civil reconstruction projects after military operations in Grenada, Panama and Somalia. I attained the rank of Colonel during my military service.

This is the only time in my many years serving America that I have felt I cannot represent the policies of an Administration of the United States. I disagree with the Administration's policies on Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, North Korea and curtailment of civil liberties in the U.S. itself. I believe the Administration's policies are making the world a more dangerous, not a safer, place. I feel obligated morally and professionally to set out my very deep and firm concerns on these policies and to resign from
government service as I cannot defend or implement them.

I hope you will bear with my explanation of why I must resign. After thirty years of service to my country, my decision to resign is a huge step and I want to be clear in my reasons why I must do so.

I wrote this letter five weeks ago and held it hoping that the Administration would not go to war against Iraq at this time without United Nations Security Council agreement. I strongly believe that going to war now will make the world more dangerous, not safer.

There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein is a despicable dictator and has done incredible damage to the Iraqi people and others of the region. I totally support the international community's demand that Saddam's regime destroy weapons of mass destruction.

However, I believe we should not use US military force without UNSC agreement to ensure compliance. In our press for military action now, we have created deep chasms in the international community and in important international organizations. Our policies have alienated many of our allies and created ill will in much of the world.

Countries of the world supported America's action in Afghanistan as a response to the September 11 Al Qaida attacks on America. Since then, America has lost the incredible sympathy of most of the world because of our policy toward Iraq. Much of the world considers our statements about Iraq as arrogant, untruthful and masking a hidden agenda. Leaders of moderate Moslem/Arab countries warn us about predicable outrage and anger of the youth of their countries if America enters an Arab country with the purpose of attacking Moslems/Arabs, not defending them. Attacking the Saddam regime in Iraq now is very different than expelling the same regime from Kuwait, as we did ten years ago.

I strongly believe the probable response of many Arabs of the region and Moslems of the world if the US enters Iraq without UNSC agreement will result in actions extraordinarily dangerous to America and Americans. Military action now without UNSC agreement is much more dangerous for America and the world than allowing the UN weapons inspections to proceed and subsequently taking UNSC authorized action if warranted.

I firmly believe the probability of Saddam using weapons of mass destruction is low, as he knows that using those weapons will trigger an immediate, strong and justified international response. There will be no question of action against Saddam in that case. I strongly disagree with the use of a "preemptive attack" against Iraq and believe that this preemptive attack policy will be used against us and provide justification for individuals and groups to "preemptively attack" America and American citizens.

The international military build-up is providing pressure on the regime that is resulting in a slow, but steady disclosure of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). We should give the weapons inspectors time to do their job. We should not give extremist Moslems/ Arabs a further cause to hate America, or give moderate Moslems a reason to join the extremists. Additionally, we must reevaluate keeping our military forces in the Middle East, particularly in Saudi Arabia. Their presence on the Islamic "holy soil" of Saudi Arabia will be an anti-American rally cry for Moslems as long as the US military remains and a strong reason, in their opinion, for actions against the US government and American citizens.

Although I strongly believe the time in not yet right for military action in Iraq, as a soldier who has been in several military operations, I hope General Franks, US and coalition forces can accomplish the missions they will be ordered do without loss of civilian or military life and without destruction of the Iraqi peoples' homes and livelihood. I strongly urge the Department of State to attempt again to stop the policy that is leading us to military action in Iraq without UNSC agreement. Timing is everything and this is not yet the time for military action.

* I disagree with the Administration's lack of effort in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Likewise, I cannot support the lack of effort by the Administration to use its influence to resurrect the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. As Palestinian suicide bombers kill Israelis and Israeli military operations kill Palestinians and destroy Palestinian towns and cities, the Administration has done little to end the violence. We must exert our considerable financial influence on the Israelis to stop destroying cities and on the Palestinians to curb its youth suicide bombers. I hope the Administration's long-needed "Roadmap for Peace" will have the human resources and political capital needed to finally make some progress toward
peace.

Additionally, I cannot support the Administration's position on North Korea. With weapons, bombs and missiles, the risks that North Korea poses are too great to ignore. I strongly believe the Administration's lack of substantive discussion, dialogue and engagement over the last two years has jeopardized security on the peninsula and the region. The situation with North Korea is dangerous for us to continue to neglect.

* I disagree with the Administration's policies on Unnecessary Curtailment of Rights in America

Further, I cannot support the Administration's unnecessary curtailment of civil rights following September 11. The investigation of those suspected of ties with terrorist organizations is critical but the legal system of America for 200 years has been based on standards that provide protections for persons during the investigation period. Solitary confinement without access to legal counsel cuts the heart out of the legal foundation on which our country stands. Additionally, I believe the Administration's secrecy in the judicial process has created an atmosphere of fear to speak out against the gutting of the protections on which America was built and the protections we encourage other countries to provide to their citizens.

I have served my country for almost thirty years in the some of the most isolated and dangerous parts of the world. I want to continue to serve America. However, I do not believe in the policies of this Administration and cannot defend or implement them. It is with heavy heart that I must end my service to America and therefore resign due to the Administration's policies.

Mr. Secretary, to end on a personal note, under your leadership, we have made great progress in improving the organization and administration of the Foreign Service and the Department of State. I want to thank you for your extraordinary efforts to that end. I hate to leave the Foreign Service, and I wish you and our colleagues well.

Mary A. Wright, FO-01
Deputy Chief of Mission
US Embassy
Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
http://truthout.org/docs_03/033103A.shtml
**************************************************************************************************

DUBAI A massacre, a crime against humanity, another U.S. atrocity against the people of Iraq.

These were some of the words many Arabs and much of the Middle East's state-run press used on Saturday to describe Friday's devastating air assault on a busy Baghdad market that an Iraqi doctor said killed 62 people and wounded 49.

"Dreadful massacre in Baghdad," said a banner headline in Egypt's mass circulation Akhbar al-Youm newspaper, with half its front page covered by photographs of two young victims of the blast in the rundown Shula neighborhood.

"Martyrs' blood flows yet again in Baghdad," said Bahrain's Akhbar al-Khaleej. "A new atrocity and humanitarian disaster committed by the Americans," Yemen's Thawra newspaper added.

"Yet another massacre by the coalition of invaders," read the main headline in Saudi Arabia's popular Al Riyadh daily.
Graphic images of distraught Iraqis wailing over bloodied corpses of relatives -- many of them women and children -- filled television screens shortly after the attack, fueling Arab rage at this deeply unpopular war which has incited even more anti-American fury in the region.

The widely watched al-Jazeera satellite television channel gave prominence to the Friday night incident, airing repeatedly gory pictures of strewn body parts and frail, wounded toddlers moaning on hospital beds.

The United States has said it is checking to see whether its forces were responsible for the blast that ravaged the mainly Shi'ite Muslim Shula neighborhood, but many Arabs said they had no doubt the Americans were to blame.

"The Americans can go to hell," Egyptian coffee shop waiter Mohamed Shukman spat out. "They don't care about Iraqi civilians, they just want Iraq's oil."

"This is brutality, the Americans have no right to do this," declared veiled Egyptian businesswoman Rawya Shaker. "This is colonialism, this is an aggression against innocent people. This is something even an infidel wouldn't do."

Anger at the United States over the attack was also running high in the Yemeni capital Sanaa, which has witnessed some of the bloodiest anti-war protests in the region.

"This is mayhem, just watching it gave me the creeps," said 25-year-old university graduate Tamer Ali. "This is shameful, it's unlawful. The Americans are killing women and children."

Syria has had its share of war casualties when a U.S. missile accidentally hit a busload of workers and many people there said they identified with the victims of Shula.

"I was watching what was happening and I found myself cursing for the first time in my life," said bashful 17-year-old student Lama. "I felt I wanted to kill not only curse."

Many Jordanians and Saudis -- whose countries are key U.S. allies that border Iraq -- also poured scorn at the United States and warned it that any more attacks on civilians would fuel calls by Islamist radicals for jihad or holy war.

Jordanians and Saudis are already furious with the United States for its support of what they see as Israel's brutal crackdown on a Palestinian independence uprising, and the Shula attack only intensified their rage.

"Everyone now wants to be like Osama bin Laden," said Muhanad Abdullah, an outraged Jordanian computer programmer. "They have made thousands of bin Ladens. They will see what the future will bring upon them."

The United States and Britain say they are invading Iraq to liberate its people from its "tyrant" President Saddam Hussein. While many Arabs have no sympathy for the Iraqi leader, they are set against this war.

"I am not defending Saddam, but we don't have to kill a whole population and destroy a nation to remove him," said Egyptian pharmacist Ehab Abdul Latif.

"The Americans say they are liberating Iraq but you can only make peace through peaceful means, not by terror," he said.

Against a background of fresh violence in the West Bank and a call for the United States to publish its "road map" for peace in the Middle East, the United Nations has questioned the legality of Israel's security wall.

A UN investigator said the wall Israel says is to protect its citizens from Palestinian gunmen and suicide bombers was an illegal "creeping annexation" of Palestinian territory.

"The wall is being used as a way of expanding Israel's territory," the special rapporteur, John Dugard, said on Thursday before presenting a report to the Geneva-based UN Commission on Human Rights. "It amounts to illegal territorial gain."

Israel's Defence Ministry this week proposed extending the fence, which roughly follows the frontier with the West Bank, deeper into the West Bank to protect the Jewish settlements of Ariel, Emmanuel and Keddumim.

"Israel claims this is a temporary security measure, but I think the reality is that this is a form of creeping annexation of Palestinian territory," Mr Dugard said.

In his report on the violation of human rights in the occupied territories he said neither party in the more than two-year Palestinian uprising for statehood had paid proper respect to civilian life.

While Israel had real security concerns which could not be ignored, its response was excessive and disproportionate to the Palestinian attacks, he said.

The huge number of deaths and injuries, the humanitarian crisis, property destruction and the expansion of Israeli territory into the West Bank were not justifiable, he said.

"In this age of anti-terrorism measures, Israel has succeeded in gaining tremendous sympathy for its argument that it is engaged in defensive action in response to Palestinian suicide bombers," Mr Dugard said. "It is a disproportionate response which can't be justified on the grounds of military necessity."

In fresh violence, Israeli troops shot dead a 20-year-old Palestinian man in a refugee camp in the West Bank town of Tulkarm yesterday, Palestinian witnesses said.

The shooting followed a strike by an Israeli helicopter gunship on Thursday that killed two Palestinian policemen in Gaza.

Israeli-Palestinian violence has continued sporadically despite Washington's appeal for calm after 30 months of conflict.

Witnesses said troops entered the Tulkarm refugee camp in jeeps and armoured personnel carriers shortly after midnight and searched several houses.

They said soldiers fired without provocation from one of the houses towards the street, killing a 20-year-old Palestinian passing by and wounding another man.

On the diplomatic front, Palestinian officials urged President George Bush to keep his promise and publish the so-called "road map" for peace between Israel and Palestine.

Mr Bush said at a meeting in Camp David with the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, on Thursday: "Soon we will release the road map that is designed to help turn that vision into reality," without specifying exactly when.

The chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erakat, called for concrete action, saying: "We hope that these promises are not just trying to soften us up ... and that we can expect action rather than words."

He noted that publication of the plan, drafted by the US, Russia, UN and European Union, had already been put back six times.

"I don't know what pretext he could find for putting it off a seventh time," Mr Erakat said.