Summary Afternoons with IPCRI: "Final Status Agreement: Possibilities & Challenges"

Afternoons with IPCRI A Final Status Agreement: Possibilities & Challenges

March 3rd, 2014 Tel Aviv University

The on going peace negotiations resumed in July, and since then there has been little public information about the progress or where the negotiations will lead. Could the Palestinian-­‐Israeli conflict finally be resolved or will the negotiations collapse?

To talk about the ongoing negotiations and the history of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, Israel-­‐Palestine: Creative Regional Initiatives (IPCRI) invited the public to a discussion on: "Final Status Agreement: Possibilities & Challenges" together with the Evans and International Program in Mediation and Conflict Resolution at Tel Aviv University and the Palestinian Committee for Interaction with the Israeli Society. This event was made possible with the generous support of The Government of Switzerland.

Ms. Riman Barakat, IPCRI’s Palestinian Co-­‐Director and the Honorable Ambassador Wolfgang Amadeus Breulhart, Ambassador of Switzerland, made the opening remarks. Panelists included Dr. Nabil Sha’ath, former Palestinian Chief Negotiator and Member of Fatah Central Committee in charge of External Relations, and Dan Meridor, former Israeli Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intelligence. Professor Ephraim (Eppie) Ya’ar moderated the discussion. There were about 150 participants, which shows there is a great interest in the peace negotiations among the Israeli public.

Nabil Sha’ath’s Perspective

One of Dr. Sha’ath’s most well-­‐known citations is “I have seen peace.” He brought this up during the discussion at Tel Aviv University and stressed that he has truly seen peace in this region during the time when the Oslo accord had recently been signed. He said during this time, people in the region were very optimistic and cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians flourished. During this time, Israel signed an agreement with Qatar regarding importing oil, and other Arab countries started to look at Israel as a prospective business partner. Dr. Sha’ath wishes that the Israelis could see the opportunities that opened up for them during peaceful times and the fact that Israeli economy can really benefit now from a peace agreement.

During the first three years after Oslo, Palestinians also witnessed great advancements, as their civil society was built up and the Palestinian Authority was established. New schools, hospitals and infrastructure were built, which the Palestinian territories greatly needed. However, the Gulf War disrupted and contributed to ending the peace process at that time. Dr. Sha’ath also mentioned regime changes in the U.S. and Israel as one of the elements that hindered the negotiations. During Camp David, where both Dr. Sha’ath and Mr. Meridor were active, the Clinton administration only had four months left in office, complicating the agreement and its implementation. Dr. Sha’ath deplored the failure of the Oslo Peace Agreement, which did not lead to a final status solution. He stressed that this period was favorable for a peace agreement, but did not succeed because of a lack of mutual understanding about the aspirations of the Jewish and Palestinian people. He stated that he wishes in the future for long-­‐term decisions to be taken during the negotiation process.

Dr. Sha’ath stated that today there are only two possible solutions to the Israeli-­‐Palestinian conflict, either a one-­‐state or a two-­‐state solution. Right now the Palestinians are more eager to reach a two-­‐state solution, and it seems to be what the Israelis at the negotiating table want as well.

P.O. Box 11091, Jerusalem 91110 Phone: +972-(0)2-676-9460  Fax: +972-(0)2-676-8011 office@ipcri.org  www.facebook.com/IPCRI  www.ipcri.org

Afternoons with IPCRI A Final Status Agreement: Possibilities & Challenges

However, this cannot happen as long as Israel is present in the entire West Bank, Sha’ath continued. During recent talks, Israelis want a military presence in the Jordan Valley for more than ten more years. If this is implemented, Israel would possibly never leave Jordan Valley according to Dr. Sha’ath, and therefore extend the current situation The Palestinians needs to have control over their own country if a two-­‐state solution is going to be implemented. Since the Palestinians would have to be a demilitarized state in accordance with Israel’s demand, the P.A. suggested having international troops in the area, for example NATO or the U.N.

In order for the negotiations to succeed, both sides need to benefit from the solution. The Palestinians first and foremost wants peace, and to be able to build their own state, Dr. Sha’ath said. Peace between Israel and Palestine would also benefit Israel in the sense that their economy could flourish as they could seek more new business partners in the world. In case a solution both sides can agree on will not be reached under Mr. Kerry, Israelis and Palestinians needs to keep looking for a solution, Dr. Sha’ath stated.

Dan Meridor’s Perspective

As Dr. Sha’ath said, Mr. Meridor agreed there are two possible solutions, either to create one or two states. Twenty years ago, during the time of the Oslo Accords, there were two camps in the Israeli society; one supporting a one-­‐state solution, and another promoting a two-­‐state solution. Today, the majority of the Israeli public supports two states, which shows that the Israelis are open to the solution preferred by most Palestinians. Also, regarding the Jordan Valley, Netanyahu has said that Israeli military presence is necessary around the Jordan River, instead of saying in the entire valley.

Changes like this have been seen in the Israeli rhetoric and attitude towards the conflict’s resolution, which is a positive development according to Mr. Meridor.

Mr. Meridor pointed out that the goals for the peace negotiations need to be clear and concrete in order for the negotiations to be successful. For example, Israel made it clear that the Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Mr. Meridor does not see why Israel is demanding this and why the Palestinians cannot do this, since Arafat already recognized Israel as a Jewish state. Dr. Sha’ath responded that this requirement was not mentioned to either Jordan or Egypt before peace treaties were signed with them. Mr. Meridor also pointed out that Jordan is an actor that is often forgotten in the Israeli/Palestinian peace negotiations. In order for the negotiations to succeed, he stated Jordan has to be involved since they play such an important role in the area.

At the event, Mr. Meridor said that the fist time he met President Mahmoud Abbas, Abbas told him of the time he returned to his birth village of Tsfat (Safed) with his children. Abbas said he told his children they were not going to return there. Mr. Meridor remembers this event very well, and found it somewhat paradoxical to Abbas Israeli concerns that he would demand the right of return in negotiations with Israel. The Palestinian refugees from 1948 have received assistance from the international community and it would not be possible for all of them to return to present-­‐day Israel. Therefore, this issue is something Mr. Meridor believes the Palestinians have to compromise with. He said that to work towards a two-­‐state solution, the basis for the negotiations should be from the Green Line from 1967, not from the pre-­‐1948 border. He also said the settlement blocs will have to be part of the Israeli state in order to reach an agreement, but Israel has to be willing to give all other parts of the West Bank to a future Palestinian state. He stressed the fact that more than the pressure from the public opinion, a strong leadership is needed in order to come to a viable agreement.

P.O. Box 11091, Jerusalem 91110 Phone: +972-(0)2-676-9460  Fax: +972-(0)2-676-8011 office@ipcri.org  www.facebook.com/IPCRI  www.ipcri.org