Update on the Alternative Middle East Peace Plan

Did a little research, and it looks like there is still hope in the plan, though apparently not if Sharon has any say in the matter... I also read that the plan's backers has accused the govt of suppressing their attempt to run an ad promoting the plan on state television.

------------------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3268413.stm

Ads push new Mid-East plan

Creators of an alternative Middle East peace initiative have begun a publicity campaign in Israel to win support for their plan known as the Geneva Accord.
Advertisements in several Israeli newspapers said the full text would be sent to every household next week.

"Read it and judge for yourself," the campaign urges Israelis.

The Israeli Government has dismissed the plan, drawn up by opposition Israeli politicians and senior Palestinian officials, as unhelpful.

'Illusion'

The Geneva Accord was negotiated after two years of secret talks between prominent Palestinians and Israelis, and backed by human rights activists, intellectuals and Swiss diplomats.

Among its proposals, the plan calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state in most of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with Jerusalem as both a Palestinian and Israeli capital.

Another reported key element of the plan, whose details have yet to be published in full, is that Palestinians would not demand the right of return for refugees.

It immediately provoked the anger of Israeli ministers when it was made public last month. The prime minister, Ariel Sharon, dismissed the project as an "illusion".

"There is a roadmap and it is not helpful to make people think there might be something else," Mr Sharon said.

Copy for all

But the plan's creators, who always expected opposition, decided to make a direct appeal to the Israeli public to try to build up support before the accord is officially signed at a ceremony in Switzerland on 1 December.

Full-page paid advertisements, printed in the blue and white colours of the Israeli flag, appeared in prominent daily newspapers, Yediot Aharonot, Maariv and Haaretz, on Thursday, telling readers they would all get a copy of the plan in the post next week.

"Don't trust others, read it and judge it for yourself," the advertisements say.

Arabic and Russian versions of the document will also be available in coming weeks.

However, the Israeli broadcasting authorities have banned the campaign's radio advertisements, apparently because they are considered political advertising and so not allowed.

 

I attached another somewhat tangential article in today's International Herald Tribune.

-----------------------

http://www.iht.com/articles/117573.html

To American Jews: Israel needs your criticism
Uri Dromi IHT
Friday, November 14, 2003

JERUSALEM Next week, 4,000 leaders of the organized Jewish community in North America will convene in Jerusalem for their annual General Assembly to discuss with their Israeli hosts the "shaping of our common future."
.
As I intend to participate, I would be happy if one of the Jewish American participants grabbed me by the sleeve and demanded to know what Israel was doing in Gaza. Why Gaza? Because, in a nutshell, it embodies the major problems Israel is now facing.
.
Israel keeps 7,700 Jewish settlers in the midst of 1 million Arabs in locations that have no strategic importance and in an area which, unlike Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - doesn't even have a biblical significance (except, of course, for Samson).
.
These settlements in Gaza create endless friction with the Palestinians, breeding hatred and revenge, and securing them taxes the already overburdened Israel Defense Forces. No wonder, then, that in poll after poll the majority of Israelis say that Israel should evacuate its settlements from Gaza.
.
Those who oppose this claim that a unilateral withdrawal by Israel would be perceived as rewarding terror. The counterargument is that the time is never right. If Prime Minister Ehud Barak had not pulled Israeli troops out of Lebanon in 2000, we might still be stuck there, because of appearances. Recently, the debate about Gaza became heated, when three soldiers (two of them women) were killed at an army base in Netzarim - a post that was supposed to protect the nearby settlement, but instead became a target itself.
.
Surely American Jews have something to say about this. After all, they are fully aware of the studies predicting that in few years there will be more Arabs than Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Surely they are as worried as the Israelis that if Israel keeps the territories, it might either lose its Jewish nature or become an apartheid state.
.
In the 2002 annual survey of American Jewish opinion by the American Jewish Committee, American Jews were asked: "As part of a permanent settlement with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to dismantle all, some, or none of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank?" Ten percent answered "all," 55 percent said "some," 34 percent - "none" (2 percent were not sure). This is exactly how Israelis feel about the West Bank settlements, and it is therefore safe to assume that American Jews may be feeling the same as the Israelis in regards to Gaza as well.
.
Yet when it comes to sharing their views with the Israelis, the leaders of the organized Jewish community adhere to the motto of "Israel Right or Wrong." They don't even allow a staunch supporter of Israel such as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to say something remotely critical of Israel: When he told a pro-Israeli rally in Washington last April that Palestinians as well as Israelis have been victims of Middle East violence, he was booed off the podium.
.
It is not healthy for a friend of Israel - any friend of Israel - not to be allowed to speak freely about its policies. Take the security fence. If the erection of the fence means that olive trees have to be uprooted, that is unfortunate but necessary, and owners of the trees should be compensated. Yet if Jewish settlers destroy olive trees just to harass their Palestinian neighbors - as happened last week near Nablus - then I expect every decent Jew who is a friend of Israel to feel comfortable enough to protest, without immediately being accused of undermining Israel's cause, or being told to shut up because his or her life is not on the line.
.
In the same public opinion poll, American Jews were asked to agree or disagree with the following statement: "Regardless of their individual views on the peace negotiations with the Arabs, American Jews should support the policies of the duly elected government of Israel." Sixty-one percent agreed, but 36 disagreed (4 percent were not sure). Why, then, exclude from this discourse the voice of one out of three American Jews?
.
The love and support that American Jews have showered on Israel over the years is admirable. That they can't - or won't - participate in this central debate in Israel is therefore doubly regrettable. They would better serve the Israeli cause by giving the Israelis their honest opinion, even when they disagree. A vibrant democracy like Israel can take criticism.
.
The writer is director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute in Jerusalem.

 

America also has made a U-Turn and is now officially endorsing the plan. Things are definitely looking up!

----------------------

Powell Backs Alternative Mideast Peace
By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer
Published November 8, 2003 on StarTribune.com

WASHINGTON (AP) - Frustrated by a stalemate in Mideast peacemaking, the Bush administration is encouraging Israelis and Palestinians who are trying to bypass their leaders with a peace plan that calls for large territorial concessions by Israel.

After dismissing the private, largely symbolic negotiations for weeks, the administration suddenly is eagerly endorsing the effort, and by implication the dovish terms.

Some American analysts said they view the surprising U.S. move as a way of prodding Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to get busy on a moribund U.S.-backed road map for peacemaking with the Palestinians.

"They are trying to send a message to Sharon, without saying so explicitly," said former U.S. mediator Dennis Ross.

"It does reflect a deep concern," former Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk said, referring to the virtual halt to any active U.S. diplomacy.

There are two parallel, private efforts under way, and both suddenly have the administration's blessing.

One is a petition that Israeli Adm. Ami Ayalon and Palestinian professor Sari Nusseibeh have circulated. It calls on Israel to give up all the territory the Arabs lost in the 1967 Middle East war and turn the land over to the Palestinians for a state.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, in a speech in Washington this week, disclosed he had met with Ayalon and Nusseibeh. Praising their campaign, Wolfowitz said, "As Americans, we know there are times when great changes can extend from the grass roots."

In a second, more significant effort, former Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin and former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo held private talks and came up with a plan for a Palestinian state on nearly all of the West Bank and Gaza. Most Jewish settlers would be uprooted.

The plan also would give Palestinians control of a disputed holy shrine in Jerusalem's walled Old City - an elevated mosque compound that was once home to the biblical Jewish temples. In return, Palestinians would give up their demand for the "right of return" of about 4 million Palestinian war refugees and their descendants to Israel.

Sharon has sharply attacked the Israelis involved in that effort, saying they had no right to go behind the back of the government to make concessions, even in a symbolic deal.

These unauthorized negotiations drew virtually no official U.S. attention until Secretary of State Colin Powell responded with encouragement Tuesday to a letter from Beilin and Rabbo.

"Dear Yossi and Yasser," Powell wrote, according to a copy given to The Associated Press by a Beilin aide. "The U.S. remains committed to the president's two-state vision and to the road map, but we also believe that projects such as yours are important in helping sustain an atmosphere of hope."

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Friday that Powell wanted to "express appreciation" for their efforts. "The United States is always encouraged when there is discussion," he said.

Responding to questions, Boucher said the administration was not engaged in "some kind of end run around leaders in the region."

Nor, he said, did the praise undercut the U.S.-backed road map for peacemaking between Israel and the Palestinians.

Former American negotiators and ex-diplomats are intrigued with the developments.

Ross, the top U.S. mediator for 12 years, said he believes Powell was trying to inspire Sharon to get started on "diplomacy of his own" by praising alternative efforts. "They (Powell and Wolfowitz) are trying to create more formal efforts," he said.

Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel and a member of former President Clinton's negotiating team, said he believes Powell's letter "reflects a deep concern that with nothing happening, the prospects for President Bush's vision of a two-state solution could also start to disappear."

But, he said of the letter, "it's a weak substitute for doing something serious."

Edward S. Walker, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt and Israel, said the letter encouraging private negotiations "could be easily interpreted as a signal to Sharon."

"It may help shake up the political process in Israel," he told The Associated Press.

Walker, president of the Middle East Institute, a private research group, said the idea originated with State Department officials who felt "we hadn't responded to what was a very forthcoming effort by a couple of private individuals."

Another analyst, Judith Kipper of the Council on Foreign Relations, noted that Bush's team would have nothing to do with the Clinton administration's peacemaking efforts. But now, she said, by encouraging Israelis and Palestinians working on a peace plan it is recapturing Clinton diplomacy.

Barry Schweid has covered diplomacy for The Associated Press for 30 years.

 

well... the headline DOES read:
"Powell Backs Alternative Mideast Peace"