To return to the new Peace Now website click here.

August 13, 2007 - Vol. 8, Issue 37

CONFERENCE JITTERS; PALESTINIAN (DIS)UNITY; PEACE PROCESS HAS NO CLOTHES; NOT JUST ACADEMIC; ANOTHER DAY IN HEBRON;

CONFERENCE JITTERS: Writing about a proposal reportedly floated by President Shimon Peres, Ha'aretz columnist Yoel Marcus asks "what could be easier than poking fun at a dreamy peace plan like withdrawal to the 1967 borders? At a time when a division of soldiers has to be called in to evacuate two families from Hebron, it is hard to believe that a Palestinian state can be established alongside us on 100 percent of the occupied territories. It is hard to imagine even one of the 104 illegal outposts being dismantled, let alone a Palestinian state going up next to us based on a land swap." Yet, Marcus recalls that dismantling settlements does not have to be so difficult. "Ariel Sharon managed to clear out Gush Katif in a jiffy."

He goes on to make the point that "nobody ever died from dialogue. The Kissinger talks after the Yom Kippur War proved nothing was impossible, even in the worst of situations. The fact is, those talks initiated by Kissinger led to a full peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, in exchange for occupied territory and razing the settlements of the Rafiah Salient down to the last millimeter. And the one who set the precedent of the `last millimeter' was none other than [former Israeli Prime Minister] Menachem Begin, the Greater Israel man. Talk led to a peace treaty with Jordan and the Oslo Accords, which established Israel's acknowledgment in principle of the Palestinians' right to a state of their own. The debate was, and still is, over the territories. There have also been talks with Syria, and everyone knows that when dialogue resumes between the two countries, it will start from the point where it ended - haggling over the price. The principle of peace for territory is the key. The argument is over how much in return for what, or how much in return for how much. It depends on whether the leaders involved - [Israeli Prime Minister] Ehud Olmert, [Palestinian President] Mahmoud Abbas and [Syrian President] Bashar Assad - are strong enough to break the cycle of enmity with a territorial compromise."

Marcus adds that the "November summit proposed by President Bush in consultation with the Quartet will give him one last chance to knock out the nerve centers of fundamentalist Islamic terror threatening the free world - and wallop the axis of evil with a series of accords. The leaders of the region will have to show up with ideas and a very open mind. We will need to know in whose name Mahmoud Abbas is speaking, and how he expects to regain control over Gaza and pry it from the grip of Hamas. We will need to know how far Olmert is willing and able to go in terms of concessions based on the '67 borders. We will need to know whether Syria is capable of being a negotiating partner, and if Saudi Arabia is willing to dip its dainty foot into the pool as the patron of a comprehensive agreement, while the eyes of the fruitcake from Iran are fixed upon it."

Former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, also sees President George W. Bush's recent diplomatic effort to advance the peace process as "a last-ditch effort to salvage America's position in a region where it is on the defensive on all fronts." "Nevertheless," writes Ben-Ami, "Bush's initiative is not devoid of virtue. He has finally acknowledged the failure of the `road map,' and hence the need to skip interim stages and move directly to a final settlement between Israelis and Palestinians. Moreover, both he and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were unusually blunt in warning Israel that its future does not lie in `continued occupation of the West Bank.' Bush also came as close as he could to endorsing former President Bill Clinton's peace plan by affirming that `the borders of the past, the realities of the present, and agreed changes' will define his two-state solution. But Bush's strategy suffers from serious inconsistencies. The conference ground rules exclude radical forces - Syria and Hamas - thus encouraging them to persist in their role as spoilers. It is a fantasy to believe that peace can be concluded without the radicals' participation. As long as Hamas and Syria are left out of the US-led peace process, they are condemned to remaining in Iran's orbit."

This may be why Ben-Ami's former political ally, current Meretz Party leader Yossi Beilin, is reportedly calling for indirect engagement with Hamas. Yedioth Ahronoth's Sima Kadmon reported Friday that "Beilin believes that when everybody embraces Abu Mazen and Salam Fayad and thinks that if Gaza looks like hell then everyone will go over to Fatah's side, that is a big mistake. We are going to a process with Fatah, an organization that is almost collapsing, and even if we get close to something serious, the explosion will come that same moment: the return of terror attacks, terrorism and unrelenting Kassam rocket attacks by Hamas. People do not understand how important it is to reach a modus vivendi with Gaza. If it cannot be done directly, we need to do it through a third party, such as Egypt, Norway, Switzerland. But we cannot ignore Hamas."

Beilin reportedly proposes a process that begins with reaching a cease-fire with Hamas, followed by the return of IDF Corporal Gilad Shalit, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and finding a new arrangement for Gaza's crossing points. Under this scenario an arrangement with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas could be coupled with a long-term cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. Kadmon explains Beilin's logic as follows: "We will suggest to them that they become part of the agreement with Abu Mazen. They will not agree, but they could say that if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, they will agree to a long-term cease-fire. If we do nothing, they will do everything possible to sabotage an agreement with Fatah. We must not become enthusiastic over the fact that Gaza is becoming a prison and that we can close it and forget about it. If we keep telling every guest who comes to Israel not to resume contact between his country and Hamas, Gaza will blow up in our faces."

The dangers of continuing to ignore Hamas are also recognized outside of the Middle East. A report published by the British House of Commons' Foreign Affairs Committee concluded that pursuing a "West Bank first policy" under which Britain deals exclusively with the Fatah-ruled West Bank, while isolating Hamas in Gaza is counterproductive. "Given the failure of the boycott [of Hamas] to deliver results, we recommend the government should urgently consider ways of engaging politically with moderate elements within Hamas," said the non-partisan report, which also called on the British government to advance the establishment of a new Palestinian Unity Government. (Daily Star [Lebanon], 8/9/07; Yedioth Ahronoth, 8/10/07; Ha'aretz 8/10 & 8/13/07; Israel Radio, 8/13/07)

PALESTINIAN (DIS)UNITY: Officially, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah movement aides are not talking to Hamas. Not until the Islamic Resistance Movement reverses its violent takeover of the Gaza Strip. There will be no dialogue between Fatah and Hamas or between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, as long as several conditions are not met, Abbas' media advisor Nabil Amr told the Palestinian news service Ma'an. "The core of those conditions is for things in the Gaza Strip to return to how they were before the coup, as well as bringing those who commit[ed] crimes - looting and executions - to justice," he explained.

Nevertheless, according to reports in the Palestinian and Arab press, there are direct talks in several channels between the rival movements, as well as mediation efforts by third parties. The London-based Al-Sharq al-Awsat reported that secret talks are taking place between Fatah's West Bank strongman Jibril Rajub, former national security adviser to Abbas, and Dr. Ghazi Hamad, spokesman for Hamas' former prime minister, Isma'il Haniya. Rajub, one of a few senior Fatah figures who are publicly calling for resuming dialogue with Hamas, is reportedly briefing Egypt's leadership on the progress of the Hamas-Fatah dialogue.

Another Haniya aide, political advisor Ahmad Youssuf, told the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi that several "Arab sides" are serving as mediators in indirect talks between Fatah and Hamas. The talks, he said are taking place discreetly, away from the media, with the intention of focusing on points of agreement between the two movements and devising "mechanisms" to bridge the disagreements. He indicated that Hamas would be willing to place the security forces' headquarters in Gaza back under the command of the Palestinian Authority. "These security headquarters belong to the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people," he said. Youssef added: "I hope that in the upcoming period we would have set foundations that would bridge the Palestinian gap and set the ground for a real political partnership."

A relatively new broker of Hamas-Fatah talks is Yemen's President Ali Abdallah Saleh, who last week hosted the head of Hamas' politburo Khaled Mashaal. Mashaal came to Yemen ten days after Abbas's advisor, Nabil Amr, convened with the President Saleh. Although Amr said that the Yemeni initiative ought to focus on a return to the status-quo-ante in Gaza, a spokesman for the Fatah movement, Ahmad Abdul Rahman, laid out a very different condition for dialogue with Hamas - that negotiations should include all Palestinian factions.

Also trying to mediate is the government of Russia, which according to Wednesday's London-based al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper, handed a draft agreement to leaders of both Hamas and Fatah, as well as the two Marxist Palestinian organizations, the Democratic Front (DFLP) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). According to the London-based al-Hayat newspaper, leaders of the DFLP and PFLP recently met with senior representatives of Fatah and Hamas with the intention of bringing the two organizations to the negotiating table. According to this report, one of Fatah's conditions is a public apology by Hamas for the brutality of its June 14 takeover of the Gaza Strip.

Khaled Mash'al, in an interview with the Egyptian al-Ahram al-Arabi two weeks ago, came close to making such an apology. "We apologize to God before the people," he said when asked about statements made by Hamas leaders to the effect that the takeover of Gaza was its "second liberation." He immediately added, however, that "at the end of the day," these were "the mistakes of the victim defending himself." In reaction to this qualified apology, commentator Omar Hilmi al-Ghul wrote in the pro-Fatah al-Hayat al-Jadida: "Apologizing to God, despite its importance, is not enough because those affected by the coup are God, Palestinian legitimacy, the citizen, the institutions, the laws, and the PLO. All these are in dire need to see an official statement issued by the Hamas leadership containing a clear apology for all the foolishness that was committed by [Hamas] and a readiness to return the situation to as it was before the coup. Will Hamas abandon its coupist tendencies and go back to the road of national reason?"(Ma'an, 8/9 & 8/10/07; SABA 8/9/07; al-Sharq al-Awsat, 8/8/07; al-Quds al-Arabi 8/8/07; al-Hayat 8/6/07; al-Ahram al-Arabi, 7/28/07; al-Hayat al-Jadida, 8/1/07)

PEACE PROCESS HAS NO CLOTHES: There is a lack of support among Israelis for confidence building measures vis-à-vis the Palestinians, according to a poll released last week by the Tami Steinmetz Center at Tel Aviv University. Professors Ephraim Yaar and Tamar Hermann write that this reluctance "can perhaps be attributed to the lack of belief among the Israeli Jewish majority-63%-that negotiations with the Palestinian Authority can lead to peace in the foreseeable future. Indeed, among the minority who do think negotiations can lead to a peace treaty, 68% favor a far-reaching Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank in the context of such an agreement whereas, among those who do not believe in the chances of negotiations, exactly that number opposes a withdrawal." Nevertheless, 53% of Israelis believe that the involvement of Arab states such as Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia in political contacts would increase the chances of finding a formula for regional peace.

Leaked comments attributed to Defense Minister Ehud Barak might be seen as political posturing in light of these numbers. "You can't feed [Israelis] fantasies about an arrangement with the Palestinians anytime soon. This is not western Europe or North America. It will be impossible to consider the idea of separation from the Palestinians until we find the way to protect Israeli citizens from all the `flying objects' over their heads-from Kassam rockets to Shihab missiles," said Barak according to Yedioth Ahronoth's Shimon Shiffer, who writes that Barak's statements were made in "private talks." The process of upgrading Israel's missile defense system is expected to take three to five years.

Shiffer writes Friday that "it can be assumed that in the next elections for Knesset, Barak will lead a pragmatic, cautious foreign policy-security line that does not exactly conform to the line that the Labor Party has traditionally followed for a withdrawal, as quickly as possible, from the West Bank." He adds that the "defense minister relates to the prime minister's attempts to renew the diplomatic process with the Palestinians with a great deal of skepticism, not to say dismissively. `It's all packaging,' says Barak. `Air, or if you like, atmosphere, that's all. In the end, what decides is reality: are Abu Mazen and Salam Fayad capable of implementing anything in the West Bank or are they not.'"

Shiffer's report also alleges that Barak is undermining Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's ability to deliver on his promises to remove roadblocks in the West Bank. "Despite repeated requests of the Prime Minister's Bureau, the security establishment has yet to submit a plan for easing passage at the roadblocks. A month and a half has since gone by, but the security establishment continues to claim that the plans are `being prepared,'" writes Shiffer.

Following Shiffer's report, Barak told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a phone conversation that "every diplomatic horizon should be sought along with an obligation to protect the security of Israel's citizens." (Tami Steinmetz Center, 8/6/07; Yedioth Ahronoth, 8/10/07; Ha'aretz, 8/13/07)

NOT JUST ACADEMIC: Earlier this month, the College of Judea and Samaria, located in the West Bank settlement of Ariel, announced that it was upgrading itself into a "university center," a step designed to increase government funding for the institution. The foundation for this announcement was laid by former Education Minister Limor Livnat (Likud), who pushed through a cabinet resolution in 2005 advocating for this change because it would serve as a "lever for strengthening the higher education system in the region."

Israel's Council for Higher Education, however, is fighting this change. The council's budget committee director general Steven Stav sent a letter to his staff "clarifying that we do not see this change as a proper change in accordance with the regulations and the law." He added, "I ask that no contact from the college's representatives on which the name `University Center' appears be dealt with, including answers to letters, dealing with new curricula, budgeting and fund transfers." The council also demands that the college "immediately cease" using the term "university center," and should make public its return to using the term "college."

The scholarship at the institution does not meet Israel's standards for a university, according to Hebrew University Professor Gideon Czapski, who found that the number of articles published by Ariel faculty between 1997 and 2007 was smaller than other research institutions in Israel. "The research activity in [the college] is so small that it would be absurd to turn it into a university," he said, adding: "They may be great teachers, they may do great research, but they don't have the critical mass required to make a university."

So how did the "university center" manage this change without the approval of the Council for Higher Education? "The backing came from the Judea and Samaria Council for Higher Education, which exists due to the anomaly of Israeli life in the territories," explains Avirama Golan in Thursday's Ha'aretz. "At the beginning of the 1990s, Education Minister Zevulon Hammer asked the Council for Higher Education, which he headed, to approve curricula for new public colleges, including a handful in the territories. The council objected, on the basis that Israeli law does not apply to the territories. This move was justified, but it gave rise to a typical settler solution: the establishment of the Judea and Samaria Council for Higher Education," writes Golan.

Golan notes that current Education Minister Yuli Tamir "pledged that her ministry would not fund the College of Judea and Samaria in Ariel as a university, but this was not easy for her: Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who hastened to congratulate the college (Tamir claims he was misled), promised to fund it when he was finance minister in 2005, and 402 scientists and 12 mayors have already lauded the upgrade. As a peace activist experienced in struggles against [the settler movement] Gush Emunim, Tamir should be familiar with the method in use here: Ariel is not merely a college seeking to grow. It is the vanguard of a force storming the back door, obtaining legitimacy and bringing down the whole building. The Ariel college heads and their supporters are guided by the same principle as settler leaders. The act was unofficial, but the support was political, governmental and ostensibly legal." (Ha'aretz, 8/2, 8/9 & 8/10/07; Ynet, 8/10/07; Ma'ariv-NRG, 8/10/07)

ANOTHER DAY IN HEBRON: The eviction of two families squatting illegally in what used to be Hebron's wholesale market on Tuesday was the focus of enormous media attention in Israel. Israeli police clashed with hundreds of right-wing activists, resulting in 11 police officers injured, three of whom were treated at hospitals. Four activists were arrested. Settler leaders reported that 26 rioters were injured.

Ha'aretz's Nadav Shragai reported that the eviction "began shortly after 6 AM, after hundreds of right-wing activists had barricaded themselves inside three apartments in the market and had encircled the market with barbed wire, oil drums, and burning tires. Protesters also locked and welded shut the doors to the apartments. Dozens of teenagers, some of them wearing masks, took to the roofs of the market, from where they threw rocks, eggs, and light bulbs at security forces. Large numbers of police climbed to the roofs, where they attempted to stop the stone-throwers. The evacuating forces discovered an improvised bunker in the third apartment, where three settlers had barricaded themselves inside with flammable oxygen tanks. Concrete blockades placed in the apartment also made it difficult to reach the second floor. IDF Engineering Corps troops were brought in to break through the bunker."

The refusal of 12 soldiers to provide security for the operation, at the counsel of rabbis, has also been a heated element of the debate. The soldiers were court-martialed and sentenced to between 14 and 28 days of prison. They will no longer be allowed to serve in combat positions. The chairman of the council of settler rabbis, Rabbi Dov Lior ruled that "the participation of soldiers either directly or indirectly in preventing Jewish settlement in the land opposes the outlook of the sacred Torah, and anyone who cares about the nation of Israel and the Land of Israel must not participate in any way in carrying out this operation."

Despite the commotion surrounding this law enforcement measure, the settlers talk openly of their plans to return to the stores evacuated. Ziad Sarsur, the owner of one of the stores in the market told Ynet that "whether the settlers are inside the market or were evacuated from it - I don't see a difference, because I cannot return to my business and my store. I have been expelled for more than 13 years. In order to enter the street where the business is located - not the business itself, but only the street - I have to coordinate with the Israeli side, and even then they don't give us permits."

On Wednesday the Civil Administration issued evacuation orders for four more Hebron stores in which settlers are squatting. Settlers moved into the area, which the IDF made off-limits to Palestinians in 1994 following Baruch Goldstein's massacre of Muslim worshippers nearby as well as a stabbing in the area. The Civil Administration wrote that the squatting "was a deliberate, planned and illegal act that challenged the rule of law in the city of Hebron." Nevertheless, Peace Now's Hagit Ofran noted that the Civil Administration refused to take action against the squatters for years. "Only when we threatened to go to the High Court of Justice did the system begin to move, and I hope that in the end, the squatters will be evacuated, as happened in the wholesale market." (Ha'aretz, 8/7, 8/8 & 8/9/07; Ynet 8/8/07)