Sa'id Ghazali: For Palestinians, this is a map that leads nowhere

The release of the "road-map" peace plan, and the appointment of the new Palestinian Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas, are being seen around the world as a new window of opportunity to resolve the Middle East conflict. But most Palestinians, from those on the street to political leaders, do not think the road-map is a such a big deal – or that it will end their suffering and meet their national aspirations.

The road-map is no more than an entrance ticket to the dance hall where the Israelis will play the same old tunes against "terror". The Palestinian officials, with their VIP cards and what's left of their fancy cars, have been readying themselves for the thrilling dance that will put them once again at the centre of international attention.

A careful reading of the road-map predicts an unhappy ending. The peace plan deals with the Israeli demand that the suicide bombings and other attacks by the Palestinian militants end. But it does not give the demands of the Palestinians equal importance.

Why doesn't the road-map clearly and unequivocally include the main demand, that Israel withdraw to its internationally recognised pre-1967 borders? Instead, it refers back to UN resolution 242, which Israel has ignored for a long time. What about the future of Jerusalem's Arab quarters and the city's Muslim and Christian holy sites? Where is the solution for the millions of Palestinian refugees across the Middle East?

The road-map does not recognise the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary source of instability in the region. On the contrary, everything is the fault of the Palestinians, who unleashed the intifada against Israel.

In fact, the road-map is no more than a phased security initiative for Israel, opening the gate for the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Israelis to work together to quell Hamas, the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades and the other militant factions. The PA must do this first. Until it succeeds – no easy task – there will be no steps forward from Israel. The Israeli army will not even pull back from the re- occupied Palestinian cities.

And if the PA succeeds? Then negotiation will commence over a Palestinian state with provisional borders.The hard issues – permanent borders, what happens to Jerusalem (which both sides want as a capital), the right of return for Palestinian refugees – will all have to wait until after the creation of the provisional state.

Ariel Sharon's view of the size of this Palestinian state is only 42 per cent of the West Bank. Recently, he demanded that the Palestinians abandon their demand for the right of return for the Palestinian people, forced to flee their homes in what is now Israel in 1948, as a precondition for Israel even to accept the road-map.

But what matters here is not to make an argument against the road-map. The facts on the ground seen by the Palestinian people in their daily life are more revealing. The conditions speak of the impossibility of creating an independent Palestinian state, without dealing with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as the primary source of the problem.

The unwillingness of Israel, the US and Britain to see the changes on the ground in the occupied territories does not mean that these changes do not exist. The ever-spreading settlements and by-pass roads for the exclusive use of settlers, the Israeli army camps and training areas, the new separation wall Israel is building to fence in the Palestinians in the West Bank, the water resources under Israel's control – these are the reality.

I spoke recently with one of the ministers in the new cabinet of Mr Abbas about the road-map. He admitted that he was not sure the peace plan would achieve the withdrawal of the Israeli army from all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. He told me the landslide victory achieved by the US in Iraq is forcing the PA to lower its head. For him, the road-map is a diplomatic lifeline for the PA. "We cannot reject it because we will face catastrophe," he said.

But what is more catastrophic than the crushing load of 36 years of occupation? Thirty-six years during which more than 200 settlements have been constructed, and thousands of Palestinians killed. The PA was born out of the failed Oslo experiment. Under the Oslo accords, statehood for the Palestinians was meant to end the conflict. Now the Palestinians are asked to view a state as yet another interim phase, through which they have to jump into the unknown.

The Palestinians and Israelis have wasted precious time in negotiating these substantive issues without any success. The outcome of seven years of marathon negotiation under Oslo was zero. The same dynamic has been set up deliberately in the road-map. The PA has to accept in the end what Israel will propose, or face being crushed again, as it was crushed by Israel during the 30 months of the uprising.

On the Palestinian street, you hear a very different view from the PA's line. In Nablus, I spoke with a cross-section of people: a doctor, a carpenter, a grocer, a moderate prayer leader in the local mosque and a former activist who lost his right hand in an explosion. I asked them what they thought of the road-map. The answers were terse: "Another Oslo." "Meaningless." "A failing new experiment, a rotten meat." "Even a collaborator would not accept it."