Acht vooraanstaande experts, de meesten Palestijn of Palestijnse Amerikanen geven aanstaand president Obama advies. Zeven principes die vrede en recht kunnen brengen in Israel/Palestina.

1. Vermijdt tussenstappen maar kom met één alomvattend ‘final status’ plan.
2. Herstel het vertrouwen in Amerika door werkelijk als een onafhankelijk mediator op te treden en niet de voorkeur te geven aan één partij.
3. Ga uit van het internationaal recht als richtlijn bij elke beslissing in het oplossen van het conflict.
4. Dring bij Israel aan op het aannemen van de internationaal geaccepteerde land-voor-vrede optie en dring aan op volledige terugtrekking uit de bezette gebieden.
5. Speel een actieve rol en zet de nodige druk op Israël om op te houden met de nederzettingenbouw en andere maatregelen die het vredesproces ondermijnen.
6. Vermijdt de werkelijke oorzaken van het conflict niet.
7. Betrek de internationale gemeenschap en de VN bij het vinden van nieuwe wegen uit het conflict.

Voor de inhoud van deze aanbevelingen, lees de tekst hieronder.

After campaigning on a platform of discarding failed past formulas and
bringing “fundamental change” to Washington, Senator Barack Obama has
won his bid for the presidency.

Throughout the campaign, Obama and his supporters drew on the wisdom of
Albert Einstein, frequently declaring that “the definition of insanity
is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different
result.”

President-elect Obama has declared that pursuing a Palestinian-Israeli
peace will be a top priority for his administration.

While some insiders suggest the new administration may side-step the
issue in favor of domestic concerns, many analysts predict that the
global importance of this issue will make it nearly impossible to
ignore.

In the spirit of exploring new approaches to solving old problems, the
IMEU asked eight leading commentators in the U.S. and the Middle East
to discuss their top policy recommendations for the new administration
on attempts to revive the languishing Palestinian-Israeli peace
process.

* Sen. James Abourezk, a former United States Senator and founder
of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

* Mustafa Barghouthi, a member of the Palestinian Legislative
Council and former Palestinian Authority Minister of Communications.

* Nadia Hijab, a Senior Fellow at the Washington, DC-based
Institute for Palestine Studies.

* Diana Buttu, a Palestinian citizen of Israel living in Ramallah,
an attorney and former advisor to Palestinian negotiators.

* George Bisharat, a professor of law at University of California
Hastings College of the Law, and frequent commentator on the Middle
East.

* Omar Dajani, a former legal adviser to the Palestinian
negotiating team and professor of law at the University of the Pacific.

* Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American businessman living in Ramallah
and participant in the Palestine Study Group.

* Laila Al-Marayati, a Palestinian-American doctor and head of
KinderUSA, and former presidential appointee under President Bill
Clinton.

Recommendation 1:

Avoid partial agreements in favor of a comprehensive, final-status
agreement.

Nadia Hijab: “Obama will need to avoid the trap of supporting
sequenced, confidence building steps. Previous initiatives of this sort
have held the process hostage to security – and is a major reason why
they were not implemented. Instead, the new administration should
facilitate a mutual, comprehensive ceasefire by all sides, a freeze on
the construction and expansion of Israeli settlements, and initiate
serious moves to begin the dismantling of those settlements. The
changes Israel has made in the occupied territories are illegal under
international law and must stop, irrespective of how negotiations are
proceeding on final-status issues.”

Mustafa Barghouthi: “The promotion of respect for democracy in
Palestine is essential – however, without a comprehensive solution to
the Palestinian issue, this alone will not deliver any contribution to
stability in the region. It is impossible to expect that Palestinians
can develop a perfect democracy under the conditions of military
occupation, therefore it is necessary to simultaneously support respect
for democracy and the implementation of a final-status agreement that
allows for the creation of a viable Palestinian state where that
democracy can take root.”

Diana Buttu: “The future Obama administration would be wise to learn
from the mistakes of the past fifteen years and trade its focus on
‘process’ for an emphasis on substance. Previous administrations have
focused their attention solely on bringing the parties together,
without exerting adequate pressure to ensure that there is substance to
what is being discussed, and that any significant progress is being
made. There has tended to be a prevailing idea that ‘any agreement is
better than no agreement,’ a concept which is fundamentally flawed.”

Omar Dajani: “What is also desperately needed to bring about real
progress in the peace process is a framework for comprehensive peace
that enjoys broad international support. Unlike previous initiatives –
such as the floundering Roadmap – new attempts at peacemaking should
specify a final destination that clearly defines all terms of the final
settlement, rather than relying on partial agreements and
confidence-building measures. The reliance on partial agreements and
confidence-building periods led to the failure of Oslo – as well as the
increasing irrelevance of the Roadmap – and this failed formula should
be discarded once and for all.”

Laila Al-Marayati: “An Obama administration should revisit and invest
more time in promoting acceptance of the Saudi Peace Initiative of
2002, which offers Israel full recognition by all Arab states in
exchange for ending its occupation and agreeing to a just resolution to
the refugee problem. This is one of the boldest moves on behalf of
Israel’s neighbors to have occurred in the last half-century – yet it
received little, if any, attention or support from the U.S. government.
While the initiative may leave some things to be desired – for example,
it fails to adequately account for the needs and rights of Palestinian
refugees – it should still be considered carefully.”

Recommendation 2:

Restore American credibility as an honest broker between Palestinians
and Israelis by playing a more even-handed role.

George Bisharat: “Obama must work to restore the standing of the United
States as an honest broker between the parties to the conflict. For too
long, American policy vis-a-vis Israel/Palestine has been dominated by
partisans of Israel – such as Dennis Ross under President Clinton, and
Elliot Abrams under President Bush. A new administration should
undertake a thorough review of our Middle East policies, in which it
hears from a wide range of experts of diverse perspectives, and define
positions that reflect and advance American interests and values,
including the principles of democracy and equal rights.”

Mustafa Barghouthi: “We are not in need of another new American
government that is biased in favor of Israel. If the Obama wishes to
play a truly constructive role in Palestinian-Israeli peacemaking
efforts, this would be a core issue to depart from. Palestinians
overwhelmingly feel that the United States has too often been on
Israel’s side, and has failed to put pressure on the Israeli government
to force even the slightest of concessions.”

James Abourezk: “The Obama administration should reassess the amount of
foreign aid the United States provides to Israel, and consider
investing more in development in Palestine. Some of the money American
taxpayers are freely giving – in many cases without their knowledge –
to Israel should instead be diverted to the new Palestinian state to
make up for the billions of U.S. dollars that Israel has used to
destroy Palestine and Palestinian culture.”

Sam Bahour: “Given that the United States, for the last 60 years, has
been on the wrong side of history and has outright funded and supported
Israel while it was in blatant violation of international law – and
even U.S. laws as they apply to the use of American-made weapons – the
U.S. should dismantle the ineffective so-called “Quartet” and take a
neutral position in the United Nations Security Council on the
Palestinian issue.”

Recommendation 3:

Allow the principles of international law to be the driving force
behind any resolution to the conflict.

George Bisharat: “One of the ways the new administration can bolster
its respect is to reassert international law as the basis for Middle
East peace negotiations. International law does not resolve all of the
outstanding issues between Israel and the Palestinians, but for many –
the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland, the
illegality of Israeli settlements – it provides relatively clear and
definitive guidance to the parties based on neutral principles that are
recognized by the international community. International law has the
capacity to partially level the playing field between Israel – the
vastly more powerful party – and the Palestinians, and thus to ensure
that the terms of a resolution reflect justice and not simply power. A
just peace, ultimately, will be more durable than one that is forced
upon the Palestinians without addressing their fundamental rights.”

Omar Dajani: “The Obama administration should note that agreements that
stray from basic principles of international law and fairness will be
extremely difficult to implement. Palestinians’ rights have been
recognized and reaffirmed by the international community on numerous
occasions, and any agreement that deviates too far from the accepted
norms of international law and justice will not result in a true and
lasting peace.”

Sam Bahour: “Obama should clearly announce the United States’ adherence
to international law as the only reference point for addressing the
Palestinian-Israeli issue, be it the conflict or the resolution. This
should apply to both parties, and would greatly advance the legitimacy
of the negotiating process and any agreement that is formulated.”

Recommendation 4:

Urge Israel to adopt the internationally-accepted land-for-peace option
and fully withdraw from the Occupied Territories.

Diana Buttu: “It is essential that Obama and his advisors understand
that chances of achieving a two-state solution are rapidly
deteriorating due to Israel’s continued settlement expansion in the
West Bank and its refusal to withdraw from the Occupied Territories.
Every border proposal Israel has ever offered to the Palestinians would
have allowed Israel to maintain control over significant parts of the
West Bank. Palestinians are often vilified for having rejected
“generous offers” from Israel in the past, when in reality the Israelis
have never offered to fully withdraw from the territories – a central
Palestinian demand.”

James Abourezk: “Obama must decide to exert the necessary pressure, and
take an active role in the negotiations, securing some kind of
guarantee that Israel will leave the occupied territories – including
releasing its stranglehold on Gaza – without unrealistic conditions.
That is, Israel should be willing – and if not, pressured – to fully
withdraw from the territories once a comprehensive peace agreement is
negotiated.”

Laila Al-Marayati: “Obama should put America’s interests first when
considering policy in the Middle East. Israel’s best interests and
America’s best interests don’t always coincide – and a new
administration owes it to the American people to make our own national
interests – and not Israel’s – the priority. Bringing about a full end
to Israel’s occupation and supporting the establishment of a viable
Palestinian state are in the best interest of the United States, and
these are the goals the next administration should pursue.”

Recommendation 5:

Pursue an active role, and exert the necessary pressure to ensure
Israel halts its settlement expansion and other measures that undermine
the peace process.

James Abourezk: “Obama should take the conflict seriously. Too often,
our leaders have only provided lip-service to the cause of peace,
understanding that they can talk all they want, but unless the Israelis
are seriously pressured – for example, through the withholding American
financial aid – they are not about to give up any land. Israel is
generally satisfied with maintaining the low-level conflict that
results from its occupation of Palestinian lands.”

Omar Dajani: “The importance of the United States role in bringing
about a resolution to this conflict cannot be understated. Therefore,
it is imperative that the incoming administration take an active,
leading role in bringing the parties together – and should not hesitate
to apply the necessary pressure to encourage them to make substantial
progress toward a final-status agreement. In the past, the United
States has taken a much too passive role, mostly leaving the two
parties themselves responsible for advancing talks. Yet, precisely
because both sides are weak – and the stakes are so high – a strong
American presence is essential to bringing peace.”

George Bisharat: “Obama must take decisive action to halt all forms of
Israeli settlement activities in all parts of the West Bank, including
East Jerusalem. Israel’s unrelenting colonization of lands slated by
the international community for a Palestinian state establishes
substantial practical obstacles to attaining peace – in the form of the
settlements and the settlers themselves – and also destroys trust among
Palestinians that Israel actually wants peace instead of more land.
These facts are widely known and recognized – even within our
government – but the political will to take appropriate action has been
lacking. Yet without a complete halt to Israeli settlement activity,
there is absolutely no chance of a resolution of the conflict.”

Recommendation 6:

Address the root causes of the conflict.

Diana Buttu: “Failure to address the root causes of the conflict has
been a major failure of the peace process in the past, and a new
administration would be wise to take into account this fact. It is
often thought that this is a security conflict with political
ramifications. In reality, it is an essentially political conflict
rooted in the dispossession of the majority of the native Palestinian
population sixty years ago upon the establishment of Israel. If the
Obama administration fails to recognize the importance of this central
aspect to peacemaking, and we – as Palestinians and Israelis – are
unable to tackle these root causes of the conflict, we’ll be lost.”

George Bisharat: “Israel has consistently refused to alter its position
of refusal and denial when it comes to the rights of Palestinian
refugees, repeatedly declaring that it has no intention of
acknowledging their legitimate rights under any terms. These rights are
firmly established in international law, and have been repeatedly
reaffirmed by the United Nations General Assembly. If the Obama
administration truly seeks to achieve a lasting peace, it must
understand the importance and centrality of the refugee issue, and
furthermore must be willing to apply pressure on Israel to accept
responsibility for the problem, and work toward the implementation of a
just solution based on the principles of international law.”

Recommendation 7:

Involve the international community and the United Nations in pursuing
new approaches to solving the conflict.

Mustafa Barghouthi: “After the failure of Annapolis, we should discuss
different approaches and push for an international conference through
the United Nations in order to make peacemaking efforts more effective.
The current situation has led to stagnation, and increasing loss of
hope among Palestinians. A major international conference organized
through the United Nations would offer Palestinians hope, and signal
that the international community is serious about resolving the
conflict.”

Nadia Hijab: “There should be a much larger role for the international
community in the peace process. Arab players in the region should be
brought in to enable the Palestinian leadership to make peace and help
to offset the power imbalance between Palestinians and Israelis.
International actors should be brought in to protect the Israelis if
they decide to take risks – and also to spread the burden on the new
administration of taking on the Israeli right-wing, as well as the
American Christian and Jewish right.”

Bron: IMEU
Institute for Middle Eastern Understanding. Hier