Roadmap and PeacemakingIsrael and Palestine
What starts the numerous peacemaking efforts? What brings them to a halt? Are they doomed to fail because the problem is intractable? Or are some peacemaking plans simply unrealistic? With one-sided conditions and expectations?
Friday, October 31, 2003
Israel fumes as reports says Europe funding 'Geneva accord'
JTA NEWS: "Israel fumes as reports says Europe funding 'Geneva accord' | By Philip Carmel | Oct 28, 2003
PARIS, Oct. 28 (JTA) - The line between tacit support and direct financial assistance for an unofficial Middle East peace plan is a fine one - but a number of European states may be about to cross it, according to Israeli officials.
The two leading advocates of the 'Geneva accord' - Israel's former justice minister, Yossi Beilin, and a former Palestinian Authority information minister, Yasser Abed Rabbo - met last week with the French and Belgian foreign ministers in Paris.
The meetings ostensibly were meant to garner European diplomatic support for the peace initiative, but Israeli officials said they also were a chance to gather funds to publicize the deal back home. "
JTA NEWS: "Israel fumes as reports says Europe funding 'Geneva accord' | By Philip Carmel | Oct 28, 2003
PARIS, Oct. 28 (JTA) - The line between tacit support and direct financial assistance for an unofficial Middle East peace plan is a fine one - but a number of European states may be about to cross it, according to Israeli officials.
The two leading advocates of the 'Geneva accord' - Israel's former justice minister, Yossi Beilin, and a former Palestinian Authority information minister, Yasser Abed Rabbo - met last week with the French and Belgian foreign ministers in Paris.
The meetings ostensibly were meant to garner European diplomatic support for the peace initiative, but Israeli officials said they also were a chance to gather funds to publicize the deal back home. "
Thursday, October 30, 2003
Russia Wants U.N. to OK Mideast 'Map': United States said the timing was not right
Excite News: "Russia Wants U.N. to OK Mideast 'Map' | Oct 30, 10:24 PM (ET) | By EDITH M. LEDERER
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia introduced a resolution Thursday asking the U.N. Security Council to endorse the 'road map' peace plan for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the United States said the timing was not right.
U.S. deputy ambassador James Cunningham cited the absence of a Palestinian government to implement the peace plan drafted by Russia, the United States, the United Nations and the European Union. The plan aims to end violence and establish a Palestinian state by 2005.
...
But Russia's U.N. Ambassador Sergey Lavrov disagreed, saying he would like the Security Council to approve the resolution unanimously next week to coincide with the formation of a new Palestinian government.
"In this particular case, I think the timing is almost perfect," Lavrov said.
Excite News: "Russia Wants U.N. to OK Mideast 'Map' | Oct 30, 10:24 PM (ET) | By EDITH M. LEDERER
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia introduced a resolution Thursday asking the U.N. Security Council to endorse the 'road map' peace plan for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the United States said the timing was not right.
U.S. deputy ambassador James Cunningham cited the absence of a Palestinian government to implement the peace plan drafted by Russia, the United States, the United Nations and the European Union. The plan aims to end violence and establish a Palestinian state by 2005.
...
But Russia's U.N. Ambassador Sergey Lavrov disagreed, saying he would like the Security Council to approve the resolution unanimously next week to coincide with the formation of a new Palestinian government.
"In this particular case, I think the timing is almost perfect," Lavrov said.
British PM Blair welcomes Geneva Accord
Haaretz Article: "30/10/2003 22:15 | British PM Blair welcomes Geneva Accord | By Reuters
LONDON - British Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Thursday an unofficial plan for Middle East peace that has been dismissed by the Israeli government was a welcome contribution to the debate over the region's future.
...
"At this time both people need hope. This initiative gives them a chance to look beyond current difficulties to what might be achievable with goodwill on both sides," Blair said.
"I hope that the initiative will stimulate debate, remind people of why peace is worth working for, show that Israelis and Palestinians remain capable of finding partners for peace and working together, and encourage them back to the negotiating table."
Haaretz Article: "30/10/2003 22:15 | British PM Blair welcomes Geneva Accord | By Reuters
LONDON - British Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Thursday an unofficial plan for Middle East peace that has been dismissed by the Israeli government was a welcome contribution to the debate over the region's future.
...
"At this time both people need hope. This initiative gives them a chance to look beyond current difficulties to what might be achievable with goodwill on both sides," Blair said.
"I hope that the initiative will stimulate debate, remind people of why peace is worth working for, show that Israelis and Palestinians remain capable of finding partners for peace and working together, and encourage them back to the negotiating table."
Friday, October 24, 2003
An alternative to the "Geneva Accord" [ethnic cleansing, massive prison camp, second class citizens. ed]
israelinsider: Views: An alternative to the "Geneva Accord":By Michael Anbar October 24, 2003
The recently unveiled 'Geneva Accord' will never work. For the plan to be acceptable to Israel, the proposed new Arab state must have limited sovereignty. The entwined geography of the proposed new Arab state alongside Israel mandates that it must be demilitarized, have limited control of its airspace, have limitations on entry and exit of people, have limited rights to form alliances with other countries, and be economically extremely dependent on the State of Israel for many decades to come. The PLO may welcome these restrictions for a while, but only to be used as leverage to eventually dislodge the Jewish state by a combination of political pressure, terrorism and military assault.
Even if the Palestinians gave up on their 'right of return,' the new accord would continue to ferment local Arab dissatisfaction, which undoubtedly would be exploited by extramural Arabs to continue to undermine the existence of the Jewish state by incessant terrorism. The previously proposed 'Roadmap to Peace' requires dismantling of Arab terrorist organizations, but the 'Geneva Accord' has no such conditions. As such, it is an unmitigated reward for terrorism. If accepted it would only encourage more of it inside Israel and elsewhere. "
...
I suggest a separate and sustainable coexistence under new and different terms. I suggest the establishment of an autonomous, independent Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, with a possible increase of its area from 360 to say, 600 square kilometers. At the same time, all other PA territories west of the Jordan would be annexed to the state of Israel.
After an appropriate period of "dePLOization" (cf. denazification), all Arab inhabitants of the "West Bank" territory will be offered full Israeli citizen's rights pending their acceptance of Israeli nationality (i.e. they must swear allegiance to the existence of the democratic State of Israel). Militant religious or nationalistic Arabs amongst them will have the option to become citizens of the independent Palestinian state of Gaza, whether they move there physically or not. If they stay in Israel as alien residents they would have obey all laws of land but have no voting rights. Immigration of Muslims from other countries into the State of Israel would be limited, however, to maintain a demographic balance (immigration quotas have existed even in the USA). ...
...
Michael Anbar , PhD, is a professor in the School of Medicine at the University of Buffalo. He was formerly a professor at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot. amara@adelphia.net
israelinsider: Views: An alternative to the "Geneva Accord":By Michael Anbar October 24, 2003
The recently unveiled 'Geneva Accord' will never work. For the plan to be acceptable to Israel, the proposed new Arab state must have limited sovereignty. The entwined geography of the proposed new Arab state alongside Israel mandates that it must be demilitarized, have limited control of its airspace, have limitations on entry and exit of people, have limited rights to form alliances with other countries, and be economically extremely dependent on the State of Israel for many decades to come. The PLO may welcome these restrictions for a while, but only to be used as leverage to eventually dislodge the Jewish state by a combination of political pressure, terrorism and military assault.
Even if the Palestinians gave up on their 'right of return,' the new accord would continue to ferment local Arab dissatisfaction, which undoubtedly would be exploited by extramural Arabs to continue to undermine the existence of the Jewish state by incessant terrorism. The previously proposed 'Roadmap to Peace' requires dismantling of Arab terrorist organizations, but the 'Geneva Accord' has no such conditions. As such, it is an unmitigated reward for terrorism. If accepted it would only encourage more of it inside Israel and elsewhere. "
...
I suggest a separate and sustainable coexistence under new and different terms. I suggest the establishment of an autonomous, independent Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, with a possible increase of its area from 360 to say, 600 square kilometers. At the same time, all other PA territories west of the Jordan would be annexed to the state of Israel.
After an appropriate period of "dePLOization" (cf. denazification), all Arab inhabitants of the "West Bank" territory will be offered full Israeli citizen's rights pending their acceptance of Israeli nationality (i.e. they must swear allegiance to the existence of the democratic State of Israel). Militant religious or nationalistic Arabs amongst them will have the option to become citizens of the independent Palestinian state of Gaza, whether they move there physically or not. If they stay in Israel as alien residents they would have obey all laws of land but have no voting rights. Immigration of Muslims from other countries into the State of Israel would be limited, however, to maintain a demographic balance (immigration quotas have existed even in the USA). ...
...
Michael Anbar , PhD, is a professor in the School of Medicine at the University of Buffalo. He was formerly a professor at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot. amara@adelphia.net
Thursday, October 23, 2003
EU Business - European parliamentary delegation to meet Mideast leaders
EU Business - European parliamentary delegation to meet Mideast leaders: "European parliamentary delegation to meet Mideast leaders | 23 October 2003
A delegation of 150 European parliamentarians is expected to arrive on October 25th for meetings with the Israeli, Palestinian and Jordanian leaders, an official statement said Thursday.
...
Members of the widest-ever European delegation to visit the region will hold talks with Palestinian prime minister Ahmed Qorei on Monday and with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Jordan's King Abdullah II at unspecified dates. "
EU Business - European parliamentary delegation to meet Mideast leaders: "European parliamentary delegation to meet Mideast leaders | 23 October 2003
A delegation of 150 European parliamentarians is expected to arrive on October 25th for meetings with the Israeli, Palestinian and Jordanian leaders, an official statement said Thursday.
...
Members of the widest-ever European delegation to visit the region will hold talks with Palestinian prime minister Ahmed Qorei on Monday and with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Jordan's King Abdullah II at unspecified dates. "
Saturday, October 18, 2003
Palestinians Plan New Truce Talks: invited by Democratic members
Excite - News: "Palestinians Plan New Truce Talks in Washington | Oct 18, 5:51 pm ET | By Mohammed Assadi
RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - Three senior officials of President Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement plan to visit Washington for talks about achieving a truce with Israel in the occupied territories, they told Reuters Saturday.
Legislator Hatem Abdel-Qader said he and his colleagues had been invited by Democratic members of Congress for what would be their first U.S. visit since the start of a three-year uprising for statehood in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
...
A truce declared by militants in June fell apart in August following a series of violent attacks involving both sides.
...
Abdel-Qader said the officials would also seek the opinion of the American lawmakers about a symbolic peace accord concluded last week between left-wing Israeli and senior Palestinian politicians.
The accord, dismissed by Israel's government, calls for dismantling major Jewish settlement blocs, while Palestinians would waive the right of 3.6 million members of refugee families to return to what is now Israel, according to Israeli reports.
Excite - News: "Palestinians Plan New Truce Talks in Washington | Oct 18, 5:51 pm ET | By Mohammed Assadi
RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - Three senior officials of President Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement plan to visit Washington for talks about achieving a truce with Israel in the occupied territories, they told Reuters Saturday.
Legislator Hatem Abdel-Qader said he and his colleagues had been invited by Democratic members of Congress for what would be their first U.S. visit since the start of a three-year uprising for statehood in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
...
A truce declared by militants in June fell apart in August following a series of violent attacks involving both sides.
...
Abdel-Qader said the officials would also seek the opinion of the American lawmakers about a symbolic peace accord concluded last week between left-wing Israeli and senior Palestinian politicians.
The accord, dismissed by Israel's government, calls for dismantling major Jewish settlement blocs, while Palestinians would waive the right of 3.6 million members of refugee families to return to what is now Israel, according to Israeli reports.
Friday, October 17, 2003
Amos Oz on a new blueprint for Middle-Eastern peace
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Amos Oz on a new blueprint for Middle-Eastern peace: "'We have done the gruntwork of peace' | Friday October 17, 2003 | The Guardian
After two years of secret talks, a group of prominent Israeli leftists and Palestinian leaders this week unveiled what they claim is a blueprint for Middle-Eastern peace. Israeli novelist Amos Oz, who was one of them, explains how the negotiators finally tackled the 'radioactive core' of the conflict
...
The same old points of dispute would, I feared, trip us up again: "the right of return" or a solution to the refugee problem? "Return to the 1967 borders" or a logical map that also takes the present into account, and not just history? Open and explicit recognition of the national rights of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples to live each in its own country, or just some equivocating platitude about "peaceful coexistence"? Explicit Palestinian assent to finally and absolutely renounce any additional future claims, or "black holes" that would permit an eventual renewal of conflict and violence?
In previous agreements, including the Oslo agreement, the two sides were very careful not to get caught in the "radioactive core" of the conflict. Refugees, Jerusalem, end of the conflict, permanent borders - all these minefields were marked off by white ribbons and their resolution put off to a better future. The Camp David conference collapsed, after all, the minute it trod on those mines.
...
For my part, I say that as far as I'm concerned, "return" is a code name for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of two Palestinian states on its ruins. If there's return, there's no agreement. Furthermore, I will be a party only to a document that contains explicit recognition of the Jewish people's national right to their own country.
...
Its fundamental principle is: we end the occupation and the Palestinians end their war against Israel. We give up the dream of Greater Israel and they give up the dream of Greater Palestine. We surrender sovereignty in parts of the Land of Israel where our hearts lie, and they do the same. The problem of the 1948 refugees, which is really the heart of our national security predicament, is resolved comprehensively, completely, and absolutely outside the borders of the State of Israel and with broad international assistance. If this initiative is put into action, not a single Palestinian refugee camp, afflicted with despair, neglect, hatred, and fanaticism, will remain in the Middle East. In the document we have in hand, the Palestinian side accepts contractually, finally, and irrevocably that it does not have and will never have any future claims against Israel.
...
What does the Geneva initiative document not have? It has no teeth. It is no more than 50 pages of paper. But if the people on both sides accept it, tomorrow or the day after, they will find that the gruntwork of making peace has already been done. Almost to the last detail. ...
· © Amos Oz 2003. Amos Oz is one of Israel's leading novelists and a founder of the Peace Now movement. Translated by Haim Watzman
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Amos Oz on a new blueprint for Middle-Eastern peace: "'We have done the gruntwork of peace' | Friday October 17, 2003 | The Guardian
After two years of secret talks, a group of prominent Israeli leftists and Palestinian leaders this week unveiled what they claim is a blueprint for Middle-Eastern peace. Israeli novelist Amos Oz, who was one of them, explains how the negotiators finally tackled the 'radioactive core' of the conflict
...
The same old points of dispute would, I feared, trip us up again: "the right of return" or a solution to the refugee problem? "Return to the 1967 borders" or a logical map that also takes the present into account, and not just history? Open and explicit recognition of the national rights of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples to live each in its own country, or just some equivocating platitude about "peaceful coexistence"? Explicit Palestinian assent to finally and absolutely renounce any additional future claims, or "black holes" that would permit an eventual renewal of conflict and violence?
In previous agreements, including the Oslo agreement, the two sides were very careful not to get caught in the "radioactive core" of the conflict. Refugees, Jerusalem, end of the conflict, permanent borders - all these minefields were marked off by white ribbons and their resolution put off to a better future. The Camp David conference collapsed, after all, the minute it trod on those mines.
...
For my part, I say that as far as I'm concerned, "return" is a code name for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of two Palestinian states on its ruins. If there's return, there's no agreement. Furthermore, I will be a party only to a document that contains explicit recognition of the Jewish people's national right to their own country.
...
Its fundamental principle is: we end the occupation and the Palestinians end their war against Israel. We give up the dream of Greater Israel and they give up the dream of Greater Palestine. We surrender sovereignty in parts of the Land of Israel where our hearts lie, and they do the same. The problem of the 1948 refugees, which is really the heart of our national security predicament, is resolved comprehensively, completely, and absolutely outside the borders of the State of Israel and with broad international assistance. If this initiative is put into action, not a single Palestinian refugee camp, afflicted with despair, neglect, hatred, and fanaticism, will remain in the Middle East. In the document we have in hand, the Palestinian side accepts contractually, finally, and irrevocably that it does not have and will never have any future claims against Israel.
...
What does the Geneva initiative document not have? It has no teeth. It is no more than 50 pages of paper. But if the people on both sides accept it, tomorrow or the day after, they will find that the gruntwork of making peace has already been done. Almost to the last detail. ...
· © Amos Oz 2003. Amos Oz is one of Israel's leading novelists and a founder of the Peace Now movement. Translated by Haim Watzman
Thursday, October 16, 2003
50-page peace deal that could be the basis for eventual official negotiations, even though it has no formal standing
Excite News: "Mideast Talks Produce 50-Page Peace Deal | Oct 13, 1:20 PM (ET) | By KARIN LAUB
JERUSALEM (AP) - Two years of talks between former Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have produced a 50-page peace deal that could be the basis for eventual official negotiations, even though it has no formal standing, participants said Monday.
Israeli leaders blasted the agreement as an irresponsible end run around the government, saying the Israeli participants, among them former left-wing Cabinet ministers, centrist generals and legislators allied with Israel's opposition, had no right to make concessions in Israel's name.
...
As part of the deal, Israel would withdraw from 98 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, annexing about 20 of 150 Jewish settlements, negotiators said. The Palestinians would be compensated for the missing 2 percent by receiving some land in Israel's Negev Desert, mainly to widen Gaza.
Jerusalem would be divided by an international border, with Jewish neighborhoods going to Israel, and Arab neighborhoods becoming part of Palestine.
The walled Old City, with its major holy sites, would remain open to both sides. The Palestinians would control the Al Aqsa Mosque compound, Islam's third holiest shrine, while Israel would retain sovereignty over parts of the Western Wall, which runs alongside the mosque compound.
Palestinian refugees would be mainly be resettled in Palestine and in third countries, or be offered compensation. The document makes no reference to a blanket "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to homes in what is now Israel, defusing a major sticking point that has derailed negotiations in the past.
...
Several countries, including Egypt, Jordan, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Britain and Japan, have already shown interest in the effort, said Menachem Klein, an Israeli negotiator and adviser to Israel's delegation to the failed 2000 Camp David peace talks.
...
Once the agreement is signed, copies will be mailed to millions of homes on both sides to try to win support for the deal, Klein said. The past three years of fighting have created a climate of distrust, though support for an eventual peace deal remains high on both sides.
Excite News: "Mideast Talks Produce 50-Page Peace Deal | Oct 13, 1:20 PM (ET) | By KARIN LAUB
JERUSALEM (AP) - Two years of talks between former Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have produced a 50-page peace deal that could be the basis for eventual official negotiations, even though it has no formal standing, participants said Monday.
Israeli leaders blasted the agreement as an irresponsible end run around the government, saying the Israeli participants, among them former left-wing Cabinet ministers, centrist generals and legislators allied with Israel's opposition, had no right to make concessions in Israel's name.
...
As part of the deal, Israel would withdraw from 98 percent of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, annexing about 20 of 150 Jewish settlements, negotiators said. The Palestinians would be compensated for the missing 2 percent by receiving some land in Israel's Negev Desert, mainly to widen Gaza.
Jerusalem would be divided by an international border, with Jewish neighborhoods going to Israel, and Arab neighborhoods becoming part of Palestine.
The walled Old City, with its major holy sites, would remain open to both sides. The Palestinians would control the Al Aqsa Mosque compound, Islam's third holiest shrine, while Israel would retain sovereignty over parts of the Western Wall, which runs alongside the mosque compound.
Palestinian refugees would be mainly be resettled in Palestine and in third countries, or be offered compensation. The document makes no reference to a blanket "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to homes in what is now Israel, defusing a major sticking point that has derailed negotiations in the past.
...
Several countries, including Egypt, Jordan, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Britain and Japan, have already shown interest in the effort, said Menachem Klein, an Israeli negotiator and adviser to Israel's delegation to the failed 2000 Camp David peace talks.
...
Once the agreement is signed, copies will be mailed to millions of homes on both sides to try to win support for the deal, Klein said. The past three years of fighting have created a climate of distrust, though support for an eventual peace deal remains high on both sides.
If you have today widespread support [among Palestinians] for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, this is due to the failure of the political option
Nothing to Talk About (washingtonpost.com): "Nothing to Talk About | By David Ignatius | Tuesday, October 7, 2003; Page A25
...
"I can't imagine a situation, based on the nature of the Israeli project and the nature of the Israeli leaders, where the Palestinians would agree to lay down arms," Nasrallah answered. A decade ago, at the time of the Madrid conference and the Oslo accords, he continued, "there was a philosophical debate" about the possibility of a peace settlement. But it is over.
"The road of negotiation did not solve the Palestinian problem," Nasrallah said. "If you have today widespread support [among Palestinians] for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, this is due to the failure of the political option."
That bleak answer might be expected from the militant leader of what the United States classifies as a terrorist organization. But I suspect many Israelis would probably give a similarly pessimistic response. Their hopes for peace were also destroyed with the failure of Madrid and Oslo.
The Hezbollah leader doesn't give many interviews, but he agreed to talk last week for about 90 minutes.
Nothing to Talk About (washingtonpost.com): "Nothing to Talk About | By David Ignatius | Tuesday, October 7, 2003; Page A25
...
"I can't imagine a situation, based on the nature of the Israeli project and the nature of the Israeli leaders, where the Palestinians would agree to lay down arms," Nasrallah answered. A decade ago, at the time of the Madrid conference and the Oslo accords, he continued, "there was a philosophical debate" about the possibility of a peace settlement. But it is over.
"The road of negotiation did not solve the Palestinian problem," Nasrallah said. "If you have today widespread support [among Palestinians] for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, this is due to the failure of the political option."
That bleak answer might be expected from the militant leader of what the United States classifies as a terrorist organization. But I suspect many Israelis would probably give a similarly pessimistic response. Their hopes for peace were also destroyed with the failure of Madrid and Oslo.
The Hezbollah leader doesn't give many interviews, but he agreed to talk last week for about 90 minutes.
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
Israel Angry With Swiss Over "Geneva Accord" Peace Plan
Excite News: "Israel Angry With Swiss Over Peace Plan | Oct 15, 10:42 AM (ET) | By JASON KEYSER
JERUSALEM (AP) - Switzerland's sponsorship of an unofficial Israeli-Palestinian peace plan has angered the Israeli government, an Israeli Foreign Ministry official said Wednesday.
The 50-page 'Geneva Accord,' drawn up by former Israeli and Palestinian government officials and veteran negotiators, envisions a Palestinian state and addresses some of the issues that have sunk past peace efforts, including the question of Palestinian war refugees.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Jonathan Peled said the government was annoyed with the Swiss for funding the effort and hosting the talks in Geneva.
'I'm not sure that we are furious with them but we are certainly checking to see what the Swiss involvement is,' Peled said. 'We will explain to them that agreements and negotiations are conducted between governments and not private individuals.'
Funding has also come from Britain, Japan, Norway and Sweden."
Excite News: "Israel Angry With Swiss Over Peace Plan | Oct 15, 10:42 AM (ET) | By JASON KEYSER
JERUSALEM (AP) - Switzerland's sponsorship of an unofficial Israeli-Palestinian peace plan has angered the Israeli government, an Israeli Foreign Ministry official said Wednesday.
The 50-page 'Geneva Accord,' drawn up by former Israeli and Palestinian government officials and veteran negotiators, envisions a Palestinian state and addresses some of the issues that have sunk past peace efforts, including the question of Palestinian war refugees.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Jonathan Peled said the government was annoyed with the Swiss for funding the effort and hosting the talks in Geneva.
'I'm not sure that we are furious with them but we are certainly checking to see what the Swiss involvement is,' Peled said. 'We will explain to them that agreements and negotiations are conducted between governments and not private individuals.'
Funding has also come from Britain, Japan, Norway and Sweden."
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Unofficial Middle East peace plan gets mixed reaction
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Unofficial Middle East peace plan gets mixed reaction: "Midday update | Associated Press | Tuesday October 14, 2003
Yasser Arafat and the Israeli opposition leader, Shimon Peres, today lent their qualified support to an unofficial peace treaty drawn up by former Israeli and Palestinian government officials and veteran negotiators.
But both the Israeli government and Palestinian refugee groups oppose the document, which has no official backing.
Today Mr Arafat did not comment on the specifics of the plan, which would give Palestinians a state in virtually all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and divide Jerusalem, but largely keep Palestinian refugees from returning to homes in what is now Israel.
'Our policy is not to undercut any attempt to reach the peace of the brave,' Mr Arafat said.
The plan envisions a Palestinian state in 98% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, lands Israel occupied in the 1967 Middle East war. It would give Palestinian refugees - who fled or were forced to flee their homes during the 1948 war - three options, but would block the possibility of having them resettle in large numbers in what is today Israel.
Israeli and Palestinian negotiators hope to sign the "Geneva Accord" in the Swiss city on November 4, the eighth anniversary of the assassination of Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin by an extremist Jew who opposed his peace moves.
The fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of the Jerusalem holy sites had been the main obstacles in Camp David talks in the summer of 2000 and several months later in negotiations at the Egyptian resort of Taba. ...
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Unofficial Middle East peace plan gets mixed reaction: "Midday update | Associated Press | Tuesday October 14, 2003
Yasser Arafat and the Israeli opposition leader, Shimon Peres, today lent their qualified support to an unofficial peace treaty drawn up by former Israeli and Palestinian government officials and veteran negotiators.
But both the Israeli government and Palestinian refugee groups oppose the document, which has no official backing.
Today Mr Arafat did not comment on the specifics of the plan, which would give Palestinians a state in virtually all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and divide Jerusalem, but largely keep Palestinian refugees from returning to homes in what is now Israel.
'Our policy is not to undercut any attempt to reach the peace of the brave,' Mr Arafat said.
The plan envisions a Palestinian state in 98% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, lands Israel occupied in the 1967 Middle East war. It would give Palestinian refugees - who fled or were forced to flee their homes during the 1948 war - three options, but would block the possibility of having them resettle in large numbers in what is today Israel.
Israeli and Palestinian negotiators hope to sign the "Geneva Accord" in the Swiss city on November 4, the eighth anniversary of the assassination of Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin by an extremist Jew who opposed his peace moves.
The fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of the Jerusalem holy sites had been the main obstacles in Camp David talks in the summer of 2000 and several months later in negotiations at the Egyptian resort of Taba. ...
Monday, October 13, 2003
Israeli Left, Palestinians Reach 'Virtual' Deal: symbolic effort by Israel's opposition to show negotiations were possible
Excite - News: "Israeli Left, Palestinians Reach 'Virtual' Deal | Oct 13, 11:57 am ET | By Megan Goldin
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Opposition left-wing Israeli politicians and senior Palestinian political figures finalized a symbolic peace accord that could act as a blueprint for a real peace treaty, both sides said Monday.
But ministers in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's right-wing cabinet, as well as his Labor predecessor Ehud Barak, dismissed the talks as a 'virtual agreement' and accused the opposition group of harming Israeli national interests.
The pact, which resulted from two years of dialogue initiated by Israeli left-wingers, was a symbolic effort by Israel's opposition to show negotiations were possible rather than produce a document Sharon's government would adopt.
'In the situation of a vacuum, a lack of dialogue and violence, which has continued for three years, we were told over and over that there was no one to talk to,' said Labor Party politician Avraham Burg, a former parliament speaker.
'It now turns out... that there is someone to talk to and something to talk about,' he told reporters."
...
Former Palestinian cabinet minister Hisham Abdel-Razek said the clause on refugees would permit them to return to Palestinian areas and in some cases to Israel itself.
"In all previous negotiations with Israel, nobody could have hoped to have achieved this dream," he told Reuters.
Former Labor Party leader Ehud Barak, prime minister from 1999 to 2001, said the deal was "a little underhanded."
"The involvement of Labor leaders and former cabinet ministers is really irresponsible," he told Israel Radio.
Dubbed the "Geneva Agreement" by the Israeli media, the deal is to be signed in Switzerland in the coming weeks. The Israeli daily Haaretz said the negotiations had been financed and mediated by the Swiss Foreign Ministry.
Excite - News: "Israeli Left, Palestinians Reach 'Virtual' Deal | Oct 13, 11:57 am ET | By Megan Goldin
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Opposition left-wing Israeli politicians and senior Palestinian political figures finalized a symbolic peace accord that could act as a blueprint for a real peace treaty, both sides said Monday.
But ministers in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's right-wing cabinet, as well as his Labor predecessor Ehud Barak, dismissed the talks as a 'virtual agreement' and accused the opposition group of harming Israeli national interests.
The pact, which resulted from two years of dialogue initiated by Israeli left-wingers, was a symbolic effort by Israel's opposition to show negotiations were possible rather than produce a document Sharon's government would adopt.
'In the situation of a vacuum, a lack of dialogue and violence, which has continued for three years, we were told over and over that there was no one to talk to,' said Labor Party politician Avraham Burg, a former parliament speaker.
'It now turns out... that there is someone to talk to and something to talk about,' he told reporters."
...
Former Palestinian cabinet minister Hisham Abdel-Razek said the clause on refugees would permit them to return to Palestinian areas and in some cases to Israel itself.
"In all previous negotiations with Israel, nobody could have hoped to have achieved this dream," he told Reuters.
Former Labor Party leader Ehud Barak, prime minister from 1999 to 2001, said the deal was "a little underhanded."
"The involvement of Labor leaders and former cabinet ministers is really irresponsible," he told Israel Radio.
Dubbed the "Geneva Agreement" by the Israeli media, the deal is to be signed in Switzerland in the coming weeks. The Israeli daily Haaretz said the negotiations had been financed and mediated by the Swiss Foreign Ministry.
Sunday, October 05, 2003
Clinton Principles for Peace
bitterlemons.org - Palestinian - Israeli documentsRemarks by United States President Bill Clinton before the Israel Policy Forum January 7, 2001
lessons have to guide any effort
Things keeping moving away from Peace .. Why?
The fundamental realities are not going to be changed by delays
Immediate Actions
Principles for a solution
Fifth and, finally, any agreement will have to mark the decision to end the conflict, for neither side can afford to make these painful compromises, only to be subjected to further demands
bitterlemons.org - Palestinian - Israeli documentsRemarks by United States President Bill Clinton before the Israel Policy Forum January 7, 2001
lessons have to guide any effort
- First, the Arab-Israeli conflict is not just a morality play between good and evil. It is a conflict with a complex history, whose resolution requires balancing the needs of both sides, including respect for their national identities and religious beliefs.
- Second, there is no place for violence, and no military solution to this conflict. The only path to a just and durable resolution is through negotiation.
- Third, there will be no lasting peace or regional stability without a strong and secure Israel, secure enough to make peace, strong enough to deter the adversaries which will still be there, even if a peace is made in complete good faith
- Fourth, talks must be accompanied by acts -- acts which show trust and partnership. For goodwill at the negotiating table cannot survive forever ill intent on the ground
- Fifth, in the resolution of remaining differences, whether they come today or after several years of heartbreak and bloodshed, the fundamental, painful, but necessary choices will almost certainly remain the same whenever the decision is made.
Things keeping moving away from Peace .. Why?
- Because there are all these independent actors -- that is, independent of the Palestinian Authority and not under the direct control of any international legal body -- who don't want this peace to work
- Number two, because the enemies of peace know they can drive the Israelis to close the borders if they can blow up enough bombs
The fundamental realities are not going to be changed by delays
Immediate Actions
- The first priority, obviously, has got to be to drastically reduce the current cycle of violence
- ... the settlement enterprise and building bypass roads in the heart of what they already know will one day be part of a Palestinian state is inconsistent with the Oslo commitment that both sides negotiate a compromise. (Applause.)
- And restoring confidence requires the Palestinians being able to lead a normal existence, and not be subject to daily, often
humiliating reminders that they lack basic freedom and control over their lives.
These, too, make it harder for the Palestinians to believe the commitments made to them will be kept
Principles for a solution
- First, I think there can be no genuine resolution to the conflict without a sovereign, viable, Palestinian state that accommodates Israeli's security requirements and the demographic realities. That suggests Palestinian sovereignty over Gaza, the vast majority of the West Bank, the incorporation into Israel of settlement blocks, with the goal of maximizing the number of settlers in Israel while minimizing the land annex.
- Second, a solution will have to be found for the Palestinian refugees who have suffered a great deal -- particularly some of them. A solution that allows them to return to a Palestinian state that will provide all Palestinians with a place they can safely and proudly call home. All Palestinian refugees who wish to live in this homeland should have the right to do so. All others who want to find new homes, whether in their current locations or in third countries, should be able to do so, consistent with those countries' sovereign decisions. And that includes Israel.
- Third, there will be no peace, and no peace agreement, unless the Israeli people have lasting security guarantees. (Applause.) These need not and should not come at the expense of Palestinian sovereignty, or interfere with Palestinian territorial integrity.
- Fourth, I come to the issue of Jerusalem, perhaps the most emotional and sensitive of all.
First, Jerusalem should be an open and undivided city, with assured freedom of access and worship for all. It should encompass the internationally recognized capitals of two states, Israel and Palestine.
Second, what is Arab should be Palestinian, for why would Israel want to govern in perpetuity the lives of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians?
Third, what is Jewish should be Israeli. That would give rise to a Jewish Jerusalem, larger and more vibrant than any in history.
Fourth, what is holy to both requires a special care to meet the needs of all.
