<\/a><\/p>\n
\n1. Vermijdt tussenstappen maar kom met \u00e9\u00e9n alomvattend ‘final status’ plan.
\n2. Herstel het vertrouwen in Amerika door werkelijk als een onafhankelijk mediator op te treden en niet de voorkeur te geven aan \u00e9\u00e9n partij.
\n3. Ga uit van het internationaal recht als richtlijn bij elke beslissing in het oplossen van het conflict.
\n4. 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.
\n5. Speel een actieve rol en zet de nodige druk op Isra\u00ebl om op te houden met de nederzettingenbouw en andere maatregelen die het vredesproces ondermijnen.
\n6. Vermijdt de werkelijke oorzaken van het conflict niet.
\n7. Betrek de internationale gemeenschap en de VN bij het vinden van nieuwe wegen uit het conflict. <\/p>\n
Voor de inhoud van deze aanbevelingen, lees de tekst hieronder.<\/p>\n
After campaigning on a platform of discarding failed past formulas and
\nbringing “fundamental change” to Washington, Senator Barack Obama has
\nwon his bid for the presidency.<\/p>\n
Throughout the campaign, Obama and his supporters drew on the wisdom of
\nAlbert Einstein, frequently declaring that “the definition of insanity
\nis doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different
\nresult.”<\/p>\n
President-elect Obama has declared that pursuing a Palestinian-Israeli
\npeace will be a top priority for his administration.<\/p>\n
While some insiders suggest the new administration may side-step the
\nissue in favor of domestic concerns, many analysts predict that the
\nglobal importance of this issue will make it nearly impossible to
\nignore.<\/p>\n
In the spirit of exploring new approaches to solving old problems, the
\nIMEU asked eight leading commentators in the U.S. and the Middle East
\nto discuss their top policy recommendations for the new administration
\non attempts to revive the languishing Palestinian-Israeli peace
\nprocess.<\/p>\n
* Sen. James Abourezk, a former United States Senator and founder
\nof the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.<\/p>\n
* Mustafa Barghouthi, a member of the Palestinian Legislative
\nCouncil and former Palestinian Authority Minister of Communications.<\/p>\n
* Nadia Hijab, a Senior Fellow at the Washington, DC-based
\nInstitute for Palestine Studies.<\/p>\n
* Diana Buttu, a Palestinian citizen of Israel living in Ramallah,
\nan attorney and former advisor to Palestinian negotiators.<\/p>\n
* George Bisharat, a professor of law at University of California
\nHastings College of the Law, and frequent commentator on the Middle
\nEast.<\/p>\n
* Omar Dajani, a former legal adviser to the Palestinian
\nnegotiating team and professor of law at the University of the Pacific.<\/p>\n
* Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American businessman living in Ramallah
\nand participant in the Palestine Study Group.<\/p>\n
* Laila Al-Marayati, a Palestinian-American doctor and head of
\nKinderUSA, and former presidential appointee under President Bill
\nClinton.<\/p>\n
Recommendation 1:<\/p>\n
Avoid partial agreements in favor of a comprehensive, final-status
\nagreement.<\/p>\n
Nadia Hijab: “Obama will need to avoid the trap of supporting
\nsequenced, confidence building steps. Previous initiatives of this sort
\nhave held the process hostage to security – and is a major reason why
\nthey were not implemented. Instead, the new administration should
\nfacilitate a mutual, comprehensive ceasefire by all sides, a freeze on
\nthe construction and expansion of Israeli settlements, and initiate
\nserious moves to begin the dismantling of those settlements. The
\nchanges Israel has made in the occupied territories are illegal under
\ninternational law and must stop, irrespective of how negotiations are
\nproceeding on final-status issues.”<\/p>\n
Mustafa Barghouthi: “The promotion of respect for democracy in
\nPalestine is essential – however, without a comprehensive solution to
\nthe Palestinian issue, this alone will not deliver any contribution to
\nstability in the region. It is impossible to expect that Palestinians
\ncan develop a perfect democracy under the conditions of military
\noccupation, therefore it is necessary to simultaneously support respect
\nfor democracy and the implementation of a final-status agreement that
\nallows for the creation of a viable Palestinian state where that
\ndemocracy can take root.”<\/p>\n
Diana Buttu: “The future Obama administration would be wise to learn
\nfrom the mistakes of the past fifteen years and trade its focus on
\n‘process’ for an emphasis on substance. Previous administrations have
\nfocused their attention solely on bringing the parties together,
\nwithout exerting adequate pressure to ensure that there is substance to
\nwhat is being discussed, and that any significant progress is being
\nmade. There has tended to be a prevailing idea that ‘any agreement is
\nbetter than no agreement,’ a concept which is fundamentally flawed.”<\/p>\n
Omar Dajani: “What is also desperately needed to bring about real
\nprogress in the peace process is a framework for comprehensive peace
\nthat enjoys broad international support. Unlike previous initiatives –
\nsuch as the floundering Roadmap – new attempts at peacemaking should
\nspecify a final destination that clearly defines all terms of the final
\nsettlement, rather than relying on partial agreements and
\nconfidence-building measures. The reliance on partial agreements and
\nconfidence-building periods led to the failure of Oslo – as well as the
\nincreasing irrelevance of the Roadmap – and this failed formula should
\nbe discarded once and for all.”<\/p>\n
Laila Al-Marayati: “An Obama administration should revisit and invest
\nmore time in promoting acceptance of the Saudi Peace Initiative of
\n2002, which offers Israel full recognition by all Arab states in
\nexchange for ending its occupation and agreeing to a just resolution to
\nthe refugee problem. This is one of the boldest moves on behalf of
\nIsrael’s neighbors to have occurred in the last half-century – yet it
\nreceived little, if any, attention or support from the U.S. government.
\nWhile the initiative may leave some things to be desired – for example,
\nit fails to adequately account for the needs and rights of Palestinian
\nrefugees – it should still be considered carefully.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 2:<\/p>\n
Restore American credibility as an honest broker between Palestinians
\nand Israelis by playing a more even-handed role.<\/p>\n
George Bisharat: “Obama must work to restore the standing of the United
\nStates as an honest broker between the parties to the conflict. For too
\nlong, American policy vis-a-vis Israel\/Palestine has been dominated by
\npartisans of Israel – such as Dennis Ross under President Clinton, and
\nElliot Abrams under President Bush. A new administration should
\nundertake a thorough review of our Middle East policies, in which it
\nhears from a wide range of experts of diverse perspectives, and define
\npositions that reflect and advance American interests and values,
\nincluding the principles of democracy and equal rights.”<\/p>\n
Mustafa Barghouthi: “We are not in need of another new American
\ngovernment that is biased in favor of Israel. If the Obama wishes to
\nplay a truly constructive role in Palestinian-Israeli peacemaking
\nefforts, this would be a core issue to depart from. Palestinians
\noverwhelmingly feel that the United States has too often been on
\nIsrael’s side, and has failed to put pressure on the Israeli government
\nto force even the slightest of concessions.”<\/p>\n
James Abourezk: “The Obama administration should reassess the amount of
\nforeign aid the United States provides to Israel, and consider
\ninvesting more in development in Palestine. Some of the money American
\ntaxpayers are freely giving – in many cases without their knowledge –
\nto Israel should instead be diverted to the new Palestinian state to
\nmake up for the billions of U.S. dollars that Israel has used to
\ndestroy Palestine and Palestinian culture.”<\/p>\n
Sam Bahour: “Given that the United States, for the last 60 years, has
\nbeen on the wrong side of history and has outright funded and supported
\nIsrael while it was in blatant violation of international law – and
\neven U.S. laws as they apply to the use of American-made weapons – the
\nU.S. should dismantle the ineffective so-called “Quartet” and take a
\nneutral position in the United Nations Security Council on the
\nPalestinian issue.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 3:<\/p>\n
Allow the principles of international law to be the driving force
\nbehind any resolution to the conflict.<\/p>\n
George Bisharat: “One of the ways the new administration can bolster
\nits respect is to reassert international law as the basis for Middle
\nEast peace negotiations. International law does not resolve all of the
\noutstanding issues between Israel and the Palestinians, but for many –
\nthe rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland, the
\nillegality of Israeli settlements – it provides relatively clear and
\ndefinitive guidance to the parties based on neutral principles that are
\nrecognized by the international community. International law has the
\ncapacity to partially level the playing field between Israel – the
\nvastly more powerful party – and the Palestinians, and thus to ensure
\nthat the terms of a resolution reflect justice and not simply power. A
\njust peace, ultimately, will be more durable than one that is forced
\nupon the Palestinians without addressing their fundamental rights.”<\/p>\n
Omar Dajani: “The Obama administration should note that agreements that
\nstray from basic principles of international law and fairness will be
\nextremely difficult to implement. Palestinians’ rights have been
\nrecognized and reaffirmed by the international community on numerous
\noccasions, and any agreement that deviates too far from the accepted
\nnorms of international law and justice will not result in a true and
\nlasting peace.”<\/p>\n
Sam Bahour: “Obama should clearly announce the United States’ adherence
\nto international law as the only reference point for addressing the
\nPalestinian-Israeli issue, be it the conflict or the resolution. This
\nshould apply to both parties, and would greatly advance the legitimacy
\nof the negotiating process and any agreement that is formulated.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 4:<\/p>\n
Urge Israel to adopt the internationally-accepted land-for-peace option
\nand fully withdraw from the Occupied Territories.<\/p>\n
Diana Buttu: “It is essential that Obama and his advisors understand
\nthat chances of achieving a two-state solution are rapidly
\ndeteriorating due to Israel’s continued settlement expansion in the
\nWest Bank and its refusal to withdraw from the Occupied Territories.
\nEvery border proposal Israel has ever offered to the Palestinians would
\nhave allowed Israel to maintain control over significant parts of the
\nWest Bank. Palestinians are often vilified for having rejected
\n“generous offers” from Israel in the past, when in reality the Israelis
\nhave never offered to fully withdraw from the territories – a central
\nPalestinian demand.”<\/p>\n
James Abourezk: “Obama must decide to exert the necessary pressure, and
\ntake an active role in the negotiations, securing some kind of
\nguarantee that Israel will leave the occupied territories – including
\nreleasing its stranglehold on Gaza – without unrealistic conditions.
\nThat is, Israel should be willing – and if not, pressured – to fully
\nwithdraw from the territories once a comprehensive peace agreement is
\nnegotiated.”<\/p>\n
Laila Al-Marayati: “Obama should put America’s interests first when
\nconsidering policy in the Middle East. Israel’s best interests and
\nAmerica’s best interests don’t always coincide – and a new
\nadministration owes it to the American people to make our own national
\ninterests – and not Israel’s – the priority. Bringing about a full end
\nto Israel’s occupation and supporting the establishment of a viable
\nPalestinian state are in the best interest of the United States, and
\nthese are the goals the next administration should pursue.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 5:<\/p>\n
Pursue an active role, and exert the necessary pressure to ensure
\nIsrael halts its settlement expansion and other measures that undermine
\nthe peace process.<\/p>\n
James Abourezk: “Obama should take the conflict seriously. Too often,
\nour leaders have only provided lip-service to the cause of peace,
\nunderstanding that they can talk all they want, but unless the Israelis
\nare seriously pressured – for example, through the withholding American
\nfinancial aid – they are not about to give up any land. Israel is
\ngenerally satisfied with maintaining the low-level conflict that
\nresults from its occupation of Palestinian lands.”<\/p>\n
Omar Dajani: “The importance of the United States role in bringing
\nabout a resolution to this conflict cannot be understated. Therefore,
\nit is imperative that the incoming administration take an active,
\nleading role in bringing the parties together – and should not hesitate
\nto apply the necessary pressure to encourage them to make substantial
\nprogress toward a final-status agreement. In the past, the United
\nStates has taken a much too passive role, mostly leaving the two
\nparties themselves responsible for advancing talks. Yet, precisely
\nbecause both sides are weak – and the stakes are so high – a strong
\nAmerican presence is essential to bringing peace.”<\/p>\n
George Bisharat: “Obama must take decisive action to halt all forms of
\nIsraeli settlement activities in all parts of the West Bank, including
\nEast Jerusalem. Israel’s unrelenting colonization of lands slated by
\nthe international community for a Palestinian state establishes
\nsubstantial practical obstacles to attaining peace – in the form of the
\nsettlements and the settlers themselves – and also destroys trust among
\nPalestinians that Israel actually wants peace instead of more land.
\nThese facts are widely known and recognized – even within our
\ngovernment – but the political will to take appropriate action has been
\nlacking. Yet without a complete halt to Israeli settlement activity,
\nthere is absolutely no chance of a resolution of the conflict.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 6:<\/p>\n
Address the root causes of the conflict.<\/p>\n
Diana Buttu: “Failure to address the root causes of the conflict has
\nbeen a major failure of the peace process in the past, and a new
\nadministration would be wise to take into account this fact. It is
\noften thought that this is a security conflict with political
\nramifications. In reality, it is an essentially political conflict
\nrooted in the dispossession of the majority of the native Palestinian
\npopulation sixty years ago upon the establishment of Israel. If the
\nObama administration fails to recognize the importance of this central
\naspect to peacemaking, and we – as Palestinians and Israelis – are
\nunable to tackle these root causes of the conflict, we’ll be lost.”<\/p>\n
George Bisharat: “Israel has consistently refused to alter its position
\nof refusal and denial when it comes to the rights of Palestinian
\nrefugees, repeatedly declaring that it has no intention of
\nacknowledging their legitimate rights under any terms. These rights are
\nfirmly established in international law, and have been repeatedly
\nreaffirmed by the United Nations General Assembly. If the Obama
\nadministration truly seeks to achieve a lasting peace, it must
\nunderstand the importance and centrality of the refugee issue, and
\nfurthermore must be willing to apply pressure on Israel to accept
\nresponsibility for the problem, and work toward the implementation of a
\njust solution based on the principles of international law.”<\/p>\n
Recommendation 7:<\/p>\n
Involve the international community and the United Nations in pursuing
\nnew approaches to solving the conflict.<\/p>\n
Mustafa Barghouthi: “After the failure of Annapolis, we should discuss
\ndifferent approaches and push for an international conference through
\nthe United Nations in order to make peacemaking efforts more effective.
\nThe current situation has led to stagnation, and increasing loss of
\nhope among Palestinians. A major international conference organized
\nthrough the United Nations would offer Palestinians hope, and signal
\nthat the international community is serious about resolving the
\nconflict.”<\/p>\n
Nadia Hijab: “There should be a much larger role for the international
\ncommunity in the peace process. Arab players in the region should be
\nbrought in to enable the Palestinian leadership to make peace and help
\nto offset the power imbalance between Palestinians and Israelis.
\nInternational actors should be brought in to protect the Israelis if
\nthey decide to take risks – and also to spread the burden on the new
\nadministration of taking on the Israeli right-wing, as well as the
\nAmerican Christian and Jewish right.”<\/p>\n