Coppem News 16

Two monthly bulletin by Coppem, year 5 n.16, February 2005
COPPEMNEWS
16
PEACE
IN MIDDLE EAST
SPECIAL ISSUE ON MIDDLE EAST
COPPEMNEWS
two-monthly bulletin edited by the
Standind Committee for the EuroMediterranean Partnership.
editor
Fabio Pellegrini
assistant editor
Lino Motta
editorial director
Piero Fagone
editorial staff
Roberta Puglisi
Giovanna Cirino
Nino Randisi
Jerusalem, view of the Mount of Olives
[email protected]
traslations into English
and French
by Coppem secretariat
cover and graphic project
Luigi Mennella
printed by
Officine Grafiche Riunite
This special issue is by
Giovanna Cirino
Thanks to
Francesco Sammaritano
for his precious
collaboration
Coppem
Via Emerico Amari, 162
90139 Palermo
tel. +39 091.662.22.38
www.coppem.org
[email protected]
PEACE IS POSSIBLE
AS LONG AS WE WISH FOR IT
2000:
2001:
2003:
2003:
2005:
Camp David
Taba
Geneva
Aqaba
Sharm el Sheikh
ABU MAZEN’S ERA BEGINS
Sharm el Sheikh, 10th february 2005, Ariel Sharon and Mahmoud Abbas “Abu Mazen” shake hands
by Giovanna Cirino
Maybe this is the time for a turning
point in the history of the relations
between palestinian and israeli peoples. The ice has been broken during
the summit of Sharm El Sheikh on
the last 10th of february. After four
years marked by blood in the Middle
East, israeli prime minister Ariel
Sharon and palestinian president
Mahmoud Abbas, have both declared
the cessation of every military action
as well as violence, in West Bank,
Gaza Strip and Israel. Both are supporter of the fire ceasing.
“Intifada has come to an end” some
newspapers of Tel Aviv carried banner
headlines. During the summit it was
agreed that “palestinians shall stop
every violence act against Israel anywhere, and in parallel Israel shall cease
its military activities against palestinian people everywhere. President Hos-
FEBRUARY 2005
ni Mubarak, who hosted the summit,
and the king of Jordan Abdullah,
through their political importance,
have both contributed to the success of
the summit, which could be the occasion for paving the way for a renewal of
the american “Road Map” towards the
creation of a palestinian state neighbouring to an Israel to which security
must be assured. Us Secretary of State,
Condoleeza Rice, invited Sharon and
Mazen to meet with United States
President, George W. Bush at White
House on the next spring. That invitation has been accepted. The Us Secretary of State went to Ramallah, in
West Bank, to meet new palestinian
leader Abu Mazen. The meeting on
the eve of the summit in Sharm elSheikh, took place in a climate of renewed optimism in view of a renewal
of the peace process. The confrontation between Mrs Rice and Abu Mazen
is the highest level contact between a
palestinian leader and a representative
of the american government, following the meeting of april 2002 between
the former head of Usa diplomacy,
Colin Powell, and palestinian leader
Yasser Arafat. Mrs Rice promised to
the Palestinian Authority (Pna) 40
million dollars in aids for the next
three months. That amount of money
will be used for the infrastructure implementation. In the joint final conference, Mrs Rice “congratulated” Abu
Mazen for “the concrete measures” embarked on “in order to restore law and
order”. Then the secretary of state exhorted the israelis as well as palestinians “to spend all their efforts for giving
peace a real chance”. Moreover the
american secretary of state announced
the appointment of a special coordinator for security, with the task of contributing to the progress of israelipalestinian peace process. For Middle
East this is the “time for opportunities”
and “ it must not be thrown away”.
Mrs Rice’s diplomatic mission was characterized by optimism.” Our partners as
well as our israeli friends will be asked
for” Mrs Rice said before the meetings,
held with success, “ going on taking difficult decisions for promoting peace and
the birth of a democratic palestinian
state”. Before the meeting with the
american secretary of State, Sharon
had recognized that Mrs Rice’s visit
falls “in a period of great opportunities
in which the actions are going to be
tested instead of good will declarations”. It is not the time for civilities
anymore and it is necessary taking steps
forward for peace and I think the United States have to play an important
role” he had added. In secretary of State
opinion, “ all the elements on the table
give the chance to set the Road Map on
the right track, according the vision
such as the one that president Bush
pointed out: two democratic states living together, side by side.
1
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
THE MAN MARKING A TURNING POINT IN HISTORY
Mahmoud Abbas, better known as
Abu Mazen, is the heir of Arafat as
leader of the Palestinian Authority.
“We dedicate this victory to our martyr
brother Yasser Arafat, God rest his
soul, as well as to the palestinian people”, these are the first words pro-
nounced in al Fatah’s headquarters.
Then he added: “I will do my best to
put an end to palestinan people’s suffering, because it deserves our respect,
estimation and loyalty”. And soon after Abu Mazen addresses his warm
thanks to women, “society’s better
half”, youth and to the eleven thousand prisoners.
Abu Mazen has won the palestinian
presidential elections, with the 62,3
per cent of votes. Whereas independent leftist candidate Mustafa Barghuti
has achieved the 19,8 per cent of
votes. The other five candidates obtanined very few votes. “There was an
high turnout at the polling booths, especially among women, and it is a very
positive fact”, Abu Mazen said soon after having voted in the polling station
placed in the Muqata, the headquarters
of the late palestinian leader Yasser
Arafat. “Elections are going very well
and this proves that the palestinian
people has been moving to democracy.
There are some obstacles, but palestin-
THE NEW ISRAELI GOVERNMENT
The knesset approved the new Sharon's new coalition government. and implicitly its “disengagement plan” from the Gaza Strip with 58 ayes, 56 nays and 6 abstentions. The new
government it is now formed by Likud, Labour Party members and by the extremist orthodoxs
of the Torah’s united Judaism, but Sharon allowed room also for another religious party, that
is the Shas. As announced, the 13 representatives of Likud voted against because they oppose the disengagement plan from Gaza which entails the dismantling of 21 jewish settlements that now are located in the Gaza Strip. Sharon obtained the scanty majority only
thanks to the decision of the Jahad pacifist Left – the former party called Meretz, whose
leader was Yossi Beilin - to vote for it. Knesset’s session was a stormy one inside the assembly hall but also outside, since a thousand of supporters of the far right and settlers’movement were outside the building to protest against Sharon’s plan. Two former head rabbis, Mordechai Eliahu and Abraham Shapira, led a general prayer, amplified by the loudspeakers, asking for God’s intervention to stop the withdrawal plan.
2
COPPEMNEWS
ELECTIONS IN PALESTINE
• Turnout of voters was of the 65% of the assignees
• 1,8 million of voters called to elect the successor of Arafat as the Npa’s leader
• 7 candidates
• 8000 international observes
• In east Jerusalem the electors voted by post in 5 offices, low turnout of voters because the
palestinians were afraid of losing the benefits guaranteed by Israel (such as residence permit
and israeli identity card to be used for enjoying health care by the israeli state.
• A problematic situation in the Territories where impediments to the vote operations in Tulkarem (West Bank) and Khan Yunis (Gaza Strip) have been reported by Mohammed Dahlan, former palestinian minister for internal security, who blamed israeli army for obstructing the regular course of the election in some zones.
• Palestinian central electoral committee pointed out how Israel “does not make the passage
of palestinians to the West Bank easy.
ian people’s determination is very
strong”. Abu Mazen, meeting a delegation of international observers who
were present for the palestinian elections, stated he wants “ to offer a helping hand” to Israel. “ We offer a helping hand to our neighbours, and we
hope their reaction can be positive.
We are involved in a peace process
based on the Road Map”.
From Gaza Strip the extremist group
Hamas declared it is ready to collaborate with the new leader. And an important willingness also comes from
the islamic Jihad. After having invited
their supporters to boycott the elections, both the islamic movements
committed themselves to collaborate
with the elections winner. The feverish race to the polls decreed the political miscarriage of the boycott asked for
by Mahmud Zahar, leader of Hamas
who eventually has declares “Our system has always been constructive and
not a destructive one”.
Cautious optimism expressed by
sources close to israeli premier Ariel
FEBRUARY 2005
Sharon. “We hope that the the election of Abu Mazen will mark the beginning of a peace era for the palestinian people as well as their involvement
in the dialogue and settlement...
“Palestinians could have freely and
democratically elected their new president, we hope that now they will give
up terrorism as well as the culture of
hatred and death which Yasser Arafat
diffused”.
International community has expressed cautious optimism on the possibility that the “historic” election of
Abu Mazen as president of the palestinian authority can bring about the
creation of a real State for his people as
well as peace in Middle East. United
States president, George W. Bush, recognized that palestinian people has
take a step forward “in building up a
democratic future, by choosing a new
president through elections described
as free and legal ones by the observers”.
As White House spokesman MecClellan has then stated, the US President
confirmed his will to invite Abu
Mazen in the United States. Bush
stressed his commitment, previously
undertaken, to contribute in relaunching palestinian economy and to help
them in establishing the security
forces.
Satisfaction for the elections outcomes
has been expressed by Russia, as the
spokeman of the ministry for Foreign
Affairs said “palestinian people made a
clear choice in favour of a political solution to the conflict with Israel”.
British prime minister Tony Blair announced that his country is going to
host in London, on march, a conference focusing on security in Palestine
and political economic reforms. “Such
a conference will support palestinian
people in buiding up a real state” Blair
said in a tv interview. Eu high representative for foreign policy, Javier
Solana, when arrived in Ramallah during a journey in the region, said that
the palestinian people has voted with
“common sense and moderation” and
he thinks this vote is going to open a
new phase of the peace process. (g.c.)
3
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
A LEADING ACTOR OF THE HISTORY
BETWEEN LIGHT AND SHADE
Shimon Peres, head of israeli Labour Party,
shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994
together with Yasser Arafat and Yitzahak Rabin.
by Shimon Peres
The Palestinians see in Yasser Arafat
the father of their nation. Like a father, he did much for his children, but
he was also often overprotective of
them. Arafat is a difficult figure with
whom to come to terms. He did more
than any other leader to forge a unique
and separate Palestinian identity. He
was the voice and symbol of the Palestinian cause. His tireless efforts
brought the Palestinian cause to the
forefront of the international agenda
and kept it there for four decades. Unfortunately, these achievements came
all too often by way of the sword. He
4
fought bitterly against Israel and Israelis. He perpetrated numerous
heinous acts that left a sad trail of broken families and tortured lives. Despite
his commitments for change, he never
truly abandoned terrorism as a way of
keeping the Palestinian cause alive.
Arafat enjoyed the love and respect of
his people. This love was dear to him.
He lived a modest life and wanted little for himself. He lived for his people.
From his position of leadership he
opened the door for a historic resolution with Israel of a division of the
land between a state for the Jewish
people and a state for the Palestinians.
He showed courage in breaking with
the past. He accepted a painful compromise with Israel based on the pre1967 borders, finally leaving behind
the map offered by the United Nations
in 1947 in its Resolution 181, which
the Palestinians at the time rejected.
He accepted the changed realities. But
he did not go far enough. In the
choice between the love of his people
and the betterment of their lives, he
unfortunately chose their love. He was
not willing to risk losing his popularity and standing in the name of tough
decisions he estimated as too controversial. He once bitterly said to me, after we signed the Oslo accords, "Just
see what you did to me: From a popular figure in the eyes of my people, you
have turned me into a controversial
personality in the eyes of the Palestinians and the whole of the Arab
world." Ultimately, popularity triumphed over controversy. His declared
policies were courageous, but he did
not carry them out. He did not turn his
back on terrorism and hate. He failed
the hopes of many people, and lost his
credibility with those who could have
done most to help his cause.
Arafat kept alive for the Palestinian
people dreams and hopes that had no
place in this world. He did not open
the way for the painful but necessary
process that every person and nation
must go through, of leaving behind
dreams of grandeur that bring nothing
but misery, and learning to live, love
and prosper in this world. Arafat had
the choice between the path of negotiations and the path of terror and violence. He would have done much more
for the Palestinians and their cause had
he truly abandoned terror in favor of
negotiations. Arafat was a talented
man. He was sharp and focused. Few
things escaped his attention. Arafat
was intrigued by the ways of the West,
but all too often judged them irrelevant to his own experience. He thrived
COPPEMNEWS
Washington, 13th of septmber 1993, Yatzahk Rabin shakes his own hands with Yasser Arafat.
in anarchic situations. He lorded over
an archaic and highly centralized system, keeping extremely close reins
over the armed groups and the financial flows. In response to demand for
transparent financial management
from the donor countries, he retorted
that he was "no belly dancer." He had
no intention in engaging in what he
judged indecent exposure.
He was bemused by Israel's chaotic
democracy, telling me once, "My God,
democracy, who invented it? It's so exhausting." He had an excellent memory for names. He chose to forget many
facts. The passing of a father is always a
cause for deep grief. But it is also an opportunity to emerge as a mature adult.
The world is watching now the orphaned Palestinian people. The world
hopes to see them take control of their
own fate, bid farewell to their dreams
of youth, and exhibit the courage to
live in this world as it is, rather than as
they wish it to be. The Palestinians
must recognize that Israel is here to
stay. The Jewish people are deeply attached to their historical land, but we
also desire to live together in peace.
We must all share this small tract of
land. The Jewish people are a moral
people, and our tradition and values
mandate that we learn to live together
in peace. We grow up as people when
we learn to recognize and live with the
other - no matter how different he is
from us and no matter that his dreams
are different from our own.
We grow up when we learn to share.
And we grow up when we substitute
our anger with the world for the productive energy of making it a better
place for all to live. My prayer for all of
us - Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and
Arabs - as we look today to our future:
that we will learn to want that which
matters most in life. No more, no less.
A life has ended. It is time for many
lives to begin.
ARAB ISRAELI UNIVERSITY, PEACE GESTURES. Mar Elias University, the first christian –arab-israeli University, has been fulfilled. Following
four years of intense negotiations with the government, father Elìas Chacour, who promoted the initiative, just announced it has been approved
by the Ministry of Education of Tel Aviv. The University, that will be placed at Ibillin, between Haifa and Nazareth, formerly was a branch of the
Indianapolis University. Starting from the next autumn, technological and science subjects (as chemistry, computer science, and marketing) will be
teached in order to support the dialogue among people of different cultures and faiths as well as the development of Galilee. The courses will
be mostly in english language, but also in arabic and hebrew.
PEACE PRIZE TO PETÉR ESTERHÁZY. At the Buchmesse of Frankfurt, the german booksellers, awarded their annual peace prize to Hungarian author Peter Esterhazy for his work in literature. Esterhazy, born in Budapest in 1950, comes from an old aristocratic family. He has a mathematics degree, and is one of Hungary’s most important literary voices. Among his works published in Italy there are “Auxiliary verbs of the heart”
(E/O) and “ Harmonia Coelistis” (Feltrinelli). The novel “Revised edition” is going to be published by Fetrinelli publishing house.
A BREACH IN THE GARDEN. An hope passage, in Betania between the combonian convent and the Passionist monastery there is a garden.
There are many palestinians going through that garden to get round the wall the israelis built up and which divides Abu-dis, a suburban district
of Jerusalem, from the rest of the holy city.
FEBRUARY 2005
5
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
MIDDLE EAST, THE ORIGIN OF THE CONFLICT
Palestine and Israel, two different worlds in the same piece of land. One
armed against the other, but also working together for a real and durable
peace based on the respect for the people living in the same territory.
by Giovanna Cirino
The origins of the israeli-palestinian
conflict date back to the end of the nineteenth century when there weren’t either the Israel State or the Palestinian
one. The Ottoman Empire ruled the area
which was divided in two administrative
districts: the Wilayat of Beirut and sanjak of Jerusalem. At the end of nineteenth century, in Palestine the arabs
fight against turkish rule looking for indipendence. In eastern Europe in the
same period the Zionist movement
comes out, which aims at creation of an
israeli state. Two similar histories, a parallel path for many aspects. In the first
half of the XX century when a large
6
number of Jewish people arrive in the
Promised Land it comes out the problem
of giving an homeland to them as well as
to palestinian people. During this delicate phase Great Britain, which was
afraid of french colonization in Middle
East, plays an important role. Violating
the promises made to the arabs, with the
Declaration of Balfour, the english give
their full support to the zionist plan. Ottoman Empire falls down, and the british
mandate on Palestine, assigned by the
League of Nations, starts and it will go
on for more than 30 years. Arab people’s
aspirations clashed with those of european nations which want to be present
in Middle East. The relations between
jewish and arab people, that until then
had lived together in peace, become hostile. But after the II world war, the british
empire is no more able to keep the situation and it entrusts UNO with the decision on the future of Palestine.
Resolution n.181, 29th november 1947
a part of the territories is assigned to Israel and the other one to arabs, with
Jerusalem as “international zone” under
United Nations control. The arab
league declares its opposition. A crisis
comes out, a war begins, whose atrocities lead to Deir Yassin massacre in
which 250 palestinians die, and to the
death of 70 jewish doctors on a train.
Blood and sorrow for everybody and the
dream of two peoples and two states
fails. On the 15th may 1948 the independence of Israel State is announced
and the refugees problem comes out,
caused by the escape and expulsion of
about 750.000 palestinians from the territory of Israel State. In both the different motivations of the exodus the features of the two phases of the first arabisraeli war lie. Some of them emigrate
his own free will, they are people belonging to the élite of the arab society
such as: landowners, high officials, business men, doctors, lawyers, dealers and
teachers. They all have the necessary resources to settle in Beirut, Cairo and
Amman. This exodus had two kinds of
bad effects on the palestinian people.
Firstly, it demoralized the lowest classes
that remained, but especially the escape
of the middle classes caused the closing
of schools, shops, hospitals, offices, producing unemployment and poverty. Instead the others run away because they
were involved in the hostlities. In the
second phase of the war, starting from
may 1948 to january 1949, the palestinians run away because they were directly
involved in the conflict. The echo of
Deir Yassin massacre as well as the escape psychosis which followed sped up
the exodus. Many refugees take shelter
COPPEMNEWS
in Jordan and Gaza Strip, a no annexed
territory but controlled by Egypt; about
100.000 took shelter in Lebanon, others
in Syria and 4.000 in Iraq. At the end of
the war Israel accepted to repatriate
100.000 refugees in the framework of an
overall peace agreement but the proposal was considered inadequate by the
arabs. Except Jordan, which give them
the citizenship and right to work, in the
other countries the refugees were considered such as exiles stateless and were
settled in refugees camps without any
right. The Arab governments were quite
conscious that their fast assimilation
would have made the reason for existence of the opposition against Israel
disappeared.
The general assembly of the United Nations on the 11th december 1948 adopted the resolution number 194 which
stated that all the refugees who had
wished for, were allowed to come back
to their home and live in peace with
their neighbours. In the case they did
not have chosen to come back in Israel
they would have been entitled anyway
to a compensation for their lost properties. But there weren’t the conditions
for making the repatriation real. And in
order to relieve refugees’ suffering, the
United Nations established the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works
Agency for Palestinian Refugees) with
the task to provide for their settlement.
As far as it was a temporary measure, its
establishment provided that refugees
would not come back to their homes.
In 1959, a group of young people,
among which there was Yasser Arafat,
creates Al Fatah movement. Instead in
Israel inner political fights begin. Early
60s are very difficult years for the israeli
government which must face up arab
armed groups. In 1964 it was established
the Plo, the organisation for Palestine
FEBRUARY 2005
Liberation. In the
meanwhile the United
Nations oversees Sinai
area and Egypt goes
through a difficult period on the economic
level. On may 1967,
Soviet Union reveals
to Egypt an information that soon after
turned out to be false:
Israel is about to prepare an attack against
Syria. Nasser asked
Uno for the withdrawal of troops and, on the
21st of may, Egypt closes the straits of Tiran
and Aqaba Gulf in the
Red Sea. On the 30th
may king Hussein of
Jordan signs an agreement of mutual defence with the egyptian government. Soon
june 1967, The Israelis come in Jerusalem. From the left, Uzi Narkis,
Israel realised the situMoshe Dayan, Yizhak Rabin
ation and the short war
of six days begins, and
it brings the egyptian as well as jordan
is the most tragic in the history of the
and syrian ones arsenal to his knees.
palestinian refugees. In the same year,
East Jerusalem and the West Bank fall
Nasser organises at Cairo a conference
in Israel’s hands. On the 21st november
for ceasing fire, the agreement is
1967, with the resolution n. 242, Uno
reached, but Nasser dies of cardiac arCouncil, asks for the withdrawal from
rest, and Plo, without his support moves
the areas occupied by the israelis in the
to Lebanon. The 70s are violent years,
blitzkrieg.
the armed fight spreads also outside the
In the early 70s the palestinian fighting
middle-eastern area. On the 5th sepmovement grows. Al Fatah arranges
tember 1972, during the olympic games
both attacks against the israeli troops
of Monaco, a palestinian commando
and skyjacks. That situation is seen
kills 11 israeli athletes. Meanwhile in
such as a threat by king Hussein, who,
Egypt, Anwar El Sadat becomes the
in 1970, set off a violent offensive
successors of Nasser. Sadat wants to
against the refugees camps in Jordan, by
take back Sinai and, in 1973 together
causing the death of about a thousand
with Syria, attacks Israel in the day of
of guerrilla fighters and people as well.
Yom Kippur, a solemn jewish feast deThis moment, called “black september”,
voted to prayer and fasting. War
7
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
achieves little results at territorial level
but remarkable at political and psychologic one: the myth of the israeli invincibility has debunked and with the closing of Suez channel, oil gridlock is decided. The oil embargo brings about a
serious economic crisis in the importing
countries. On the 11th of november
1973 Egypt deals with the agreement of
ceasing fire on an equal footing. In 1974
Israel withdraws from the western shore
of Suez channel, and the following year
Egypt gets Abu Rudeis oil reserves back.
In 1975 also the hostilities between Syria and Israel cease. During the arab summit of Rabat, Plo is recognized to rightfully represent the palestinian people,
and in 1974, it is accepted within United Nations as observer. “I have come
bearing on an olive branch in my own
right hand and a gun on my left one.
Don’t let the olive branch falls down
from my own hand”. From the seventies
till today, numerous peace attempts
have been unsuccessful. In spite of the
commitment of two american presi-
dents, such as Jimmy Carter and Bill
Clinton, and the will of Israel with
Ytzahak Rabin, in finding a peaceful solution between these two peoples tormented by wars, up to now the hatred
has prevailed. Rabin himself was murdered by a right-wing extremist and the
palestinian reaction exploded with the
first and the second intifada. Bringing
about a long and complex trail of blood.
Today, Yasser Arafat, the man who has
been the symbol of the palestinian
cause, who dreamed of a state for his
people, and that with his commitment
compelled the world to deal with israeli-palestinian crisis, is dead. In the
last two years of his life he lived, as a
prisoner, in his headquarters of Ramallah. He went out only on the 29th october 2004, to go to die in a hospital of
Paris. Today a new leaf is turned over.
The election of Abu Mazen as president
of Npa (national palestinian authority),
can be an opportunity. The people in
conflict needs peace and a new future,
and the last summit of Sharm el Sheikh
in Egypt, where Sharon and Mazen
have met, occurred in a climate of renewed optimism on the prospects of
peace process resumption. Now it is the
time for difficult decisions which open
great opportunities.
STAGE ON PEACE
It has been created in Jerusalem a “rapid course of peace” intended for Kosovo. IPSIA, Acli Ngo (Italian Workers Christian Associations), has a
project for sowing seeds of peace in the unhappy balkan country, that is still going through tensions between albanians and serbians. A project
based on a pioneering experience realised by israelis and palestinians in Nevé Shalom-Wahat al Salam community, a village located in-between
Jerusalem and Ashdod, where today about fifty jewish and palestinian families live. Fifteen men and women from Kosovo belonging to the albanian serbian and ashkalia (nomads) ethnic group and living together in the region of Klina, have recently been invited in Spoleto to take part in a
workshop for a period of ten days. A sort of “course of tolerance”, organised by the Ngo and driven by the educators of the israeli-palestinian village Nevé Shalom-Wahat al Salam. After an early mistrust moment, among the participants in the meeting the ice have step by step melted away,
especially thanks to the work the israeli-palestinian educators carried out, which is based on techniques developed during years of work. Everyone
started to tell the terrible experiences he lived looking at each other eyes: close confrontations but at last it produced useful results.
8
COPPEMNEWS
ROAD MAP, A POSSIBLE MEANS OF EGRESS
The “Road Map” drafted by the
Quartet, Usa, Eu, Russia and
UN, was a negotiated settlement which should have
brought about a Palestinian
State by 2005. The final objective should have been a comprehensive solution of the IsraelPalestinian conflict. For achieving this objective, in the road
map different reciprocal steps by
the two parties were outlined, in
the political, economic, humanitarian, security and institutionbuilding fields. The path envisaged three phases. In each
phase, the parties were expected
to perform their obligations in
parallel. The Quartet would
have been responsible for the
evaluation of the parties’ performance on implementation of
the plan and establish the
benchmarks of the progress of
each phases.
Phase 1: the most complex one,
its implementation was expected by may 2003 and it envisaged
measures aimed at the cessation
of violence and security cooperation resumption, as well as the implementation
of institution building processes and normalizing Palestinian life. The Palestinian
National Authority should recognize Israel’s right to exist in peace and security
and undertake visible efforts on the
ground to restrain all the groups conducting and planning violent attacks on Israelis anywhere and dismantlement of
terrorist capabilities and infrastructure,
consolidating security forces. At the same
time Palestinians should have reformed
their institutions structure by drafting a
plan of Constitution based on a strong
parliamentary democracy and cabinet
FEBRUARY 2005
with a Prime minister empowered with
executive authority differentiated from
President’s one. Then free elections
would have been performed in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. In parallel, Israel
should have not embarked on any action
that could compromise Palestinian people’s reliance in a possible comprehensive
peace and adopting as a result all the necessary measures for normalizing palestinian life, by stopping targeted killings,
withdrawing from occupied areas after
September 28th 2000 and dismantling
settlement outposts erected since march
2001 and freezing all settlements development activity.
Phase 2: creating an independent Palestinian state with
provisional borders and attributes of sovereignty. It should be
performed from june to december 2003 and it intended to
carry out Palestinian political
elections as well as the establishment of a new Government, based on a new draft
Constitution. It was envisaged
a Palestinian cabinet devoted
to reforms, and provided with
consolidated powers. Security
cooperation and dialogue
would have been further implemented. In this phase a new
element is the organization of
an International Conference,
which should have furthered
and implemented the Palestinian reforms process, and at the
same time dealt with the support topic for relaunching
Palestinian economy. The International Conference should
have also promoted the international recognition of the
new provisional Palestinian
state, including its possible UN
membership, and dealing with the relaunching of negotiation issues between
Syria and Lebanon and the resumption
of multilateral negotiations on water resources, environment, economic development, refugees, security and weapons
control. The Quartet would be actively
involved in assuring the best international recognition.
Phase 3: the implementation the third
phase was envisaged over two years, between 2004 and 2005, and it had as objective the reinforcing of reforms and the
stabilisation of palestinian institutions, an
effective palestinian reinforcing on securi-
9
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
ty and the start-up of negotiations aimed
at an agreement on the final status in
2005. Also in this phase the main element, save that the prosecution of the
progresses on security, reforms and life
normalisation, consists in a second International Conference, called by the Quartet, which would have the task to launch
a process aimed at the achievement of
agreements on the Final Status in 2005.
Such agreements included the problem of
borders, Jerusalem, refugees and settlements. It also would be supported the
achievement of Agreements between Israel and Syria and between Syria and
Lebanon, for a global peace in the Middle-eastern Area. Three weeks after the
10
paper orders, the israeli
government approved the
“Quartet” Plan together
with a motion which refused a the possibility of
the right of refugees to
come back in the jewish
State. In a second moment
Israel sent to Washington
14 saving clauses to the
Road Map, a series of restrictions which emptied
the paper of all meaning.
Israel declared to be willing to give the control of
the three phases of the
path only to United States
and not to the whole
“Quartet”, but above all
asked that the temporary
palestinian State, envisaged in the second phase,
be totally demilitarized
and before to open negotiations it should give up the
right of the refugees to
come back.
The United States, did not
show particular attention
for the israeli requests undervaluing the
range and consequences to which these
requests would have brought about.
George W.Bush, sure of being able to
achieve a solution of israeli-palestinian
conflict with the same rate with which he
was able to get in Baghdad, organised two
summits which should have sanctioned
the beginning of a new peace era in the
Middle East. In the first summit, at Sharm
el Sheikh, the leaders of the moderate
arab countries (Saudi Arabia, Bahrein,
Egypt, Jordan and Palestinian Authority,
represented by Abu Mazen, and renamed
the “coalition of the willings”), stated
their support to the Road Map and their
commitment in preventing terrorist or-
ganisation financing. For it Bush assured
the arab Countries he would have
brought the necessary pressure on Israel in
order to allow the birth of an independent
palestinian state by 2005, and at the same
time he would have sped up his plan for a
free trade area between United States and
Middle East. The day after, at Aqaba, the
world superpower leader was even more
direct. “The Holy Land must be divided
between a palestinian State and an israeli
one”. Together with him, besides Abdallah king of Jordan, there were israeli premier, Ariel Sharon and the palestinian
Prime minister, Abu Ala, who read two
historic declarations in order to not run
down the importance of this event.
Sharon’s words: “At present there is an
opportunity for peace between israelis and
palestinians, but peace cannot be
achieved without removing terrorism, violence and instigation to hatred. There
cannot be any compromise with terrorism. Israel together with the free Nations
will keep on fighting terrorism, until it
will be definitively rooted out. Israel as
well as the other countries expressed its
firm approval of Bush’s idea consisting in
a two state solution, two different states
living side by side in peace and security”.
Addressing to Abu Mazen, Sharon assured that with the implementation of the
first measures set by the Road Map “israel
will try to re-establish normal life conditions of palestinian people and improve
their human situation”. At last the israeli
Premier committed himself to begin immediately the dismantling of illegal settlements, established by settlers in the Territories, since “Israel is a constitutional
state”, and he said also to realize that “the
territorial contiguity in the West Bank is
necessary for a thriving palestinian state”.
Abu Mazen said: “There is a new opportunity for peace based on the Road Map,
that we accepted without reservation.
COPPEMNEWS
Towards the East (kedma) - An Amos Gitai’s movie
The two state solution, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security through negotiations aimed at putting
an end to israeli-palestinian conflict, solving all the questions concerning the final
status and putting an end to occupation
started in 1967 which caused so much suffering to palestinian people. At the same
time we are aware of the suffering the israeli people lived throughout its history.
This is the time to put an end also to
these. We reassert our condemnation and
renouncement of terrorism as well as violence against the israeli people. These
methods do not belong to us and they are
an hindrance in the achievement of an
indipedent and sovereign state. Our aim is
the full cessation of violence and terrorism for this reason we are committed to
take part in fighting against terrorism”.
After the summit of Aqaba concrete
hopes for peace in the middle east seemed
to be re-opened but the question is always
the same: which is the role the United
States will play in the peace process? Attending a summit is not enough, it is necessary to have the courage to be a bridge
FEBRUARY 2005
between the israelis and palestinians, with
wisdom and fairness which are necessary
for such a role. The European Union further showed to be a not homogeneous
geo-political subject. It is necessary to
arrange a coherent plan for the middle
east at political level. Road Map paper, as
well as it was conceived, actually did not
leave wide margins of move. One of its
features consisted in planning to move to
a later phase only if the Quartet had
checked the completion of the previous
phase, even though the chance to speed
up the same process on the base of a mutual consent was not ruled out. This rigorous process in stages arranged that the
early hindrances effectively have caused a
standstill to the whole process. The failure in pinpointing definite guidelines on
the final agreement, except the creation
of a palestinian State together with the
israeli one by 2005, has made its beginning easier but in the long run it has inevitably increased the possibilities that
the two parties could withdraw the
process which the Road Map indicated,
as then it really happened.
CINEMA.In may 1948, a group of Jewish
survivors from the Shoah arrived to Palestine
arousing arab people’s hostility. It is the story of Amos Gitai's movie “Towards the East”
(Kedma) which tells the roots of the israelipalestinian conflict. Another Amos Gitai’s
film “Day after Day” (Yom Yom), through its
leading actor, son of an arab and an israeli
woman, underlines the contradictions of the
israeli society. Also Roberto Faenza and Eytan Fox, deal with these contradictions respectively in The lost lover, from Abraham B.
Yehoshua's masterpiece, and Walking on
water. In the documentary film Route 181 fragments of a travel to Palestine –Israel,
both its directors Khleifi and Silvan go along
north and south of their country following the
borderline established by the United Nations in1947 to divide Palestine in two different states. On the contrary in Private, a
Saverio Costanzo’s movie, distributed in 35
countries, he gets together palestinians and
Israelis, and expresses an intimist and universal “private policy”. Furthermore two
movies have entered a competiton in Berlin
movie Festival: “Paradise now” by Hany
Abu-Assad, which follows the groundwork
of a terrorist attack in Israel and that of
course will open a debate, as well as the
documentary film “Slaughter” in which some
former militiamen belonging to the christianlebanese army who caused a slaughter of
palestinian refugees at Sabra and Chatila in
1982 have been interviewed.
PALERMO, SICILY AND ARABS. A GIFT TO
PEACE: more than 40 artists interpret the
Mediterranean. The exhibition inaugurated
in Palermo at the Saint Bartolomeo open
gallery, by the hon. Francesco Musotto,
president of the province, will be open until
the end of january. It is divided in three sections: the first dedicated to contemporary
western and arab artists, another section
dedicated to pictures taken by german photographer Hans Gunther Kaufmann and finally a new mounting dedicated to poetry
by six arab poets who lived in Sicily in the
XI century, together with Tahar Ben Jelloun’s
verses. An initiative that is unique in its kind,
which sees Palermo, today like in the past
ages, as the scenario of happy contaminations, where the opposing points of view
can coexist and feed on each other, in a historic –political moment in which the way of
dialogue and exchange seems to be the only alternative for the peace cause.
(g.c.)
11
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
THE PRICE OF PEACE
Luciano Bozzo, CSSI’s director, thinks that coexistence is essential
tivity, the Centre organizes workshops, conferences and meetings, in
which foreign university teachers and
students can take part in. And just
with professor Luciano Bozzo, we
talked about the possible future scenarios in Middle East.
The University Centre for Startegic
and International Studies (CSSI) is
directed by professor Luciano Bozzo,
teacher of international Relations and
Strategic Studies at the Political Sciences Faculty “ Cesare Alfieri” of Florence. That Centre develops its activities through two main guidelines: on
the one hand, it focuses on the closer
examination in a theoretical as well as
conceptual point of view of subjects
such as state sovereignty, international regulations, geopolitical order and
strategic interaction. On the other
hand it is dealing with the definition
of an interdisciplinary approach of the
strategic interactions, for developing
a research method favouring the
analysis – both quantitative and qualitative- for operational and anticipatory aims. For the research on these
important themes, the Centre promotes close collaboration and exchange relations with other national
or international Centres, which have
the same scientific interests. As important occasions in support of its ac-
12
In order to achieve to a peaceful solution of the conflict, there are prices
to be paid by both the involved sides.
In your opinion which are they?
The price to be paid is the same for
both the parties, which must put up
with the future coexistence of two
states, each one with its own territory.
Two peoples, two States. In other
words, giving up programmes as well as
projects characterized by a maximalist
nationalism. On the one hand the biblical yearned-for great Israel, and on
the other hand the same yearned-for
and at the same time absolutely unrealistic cancellation of the Israeli State
from the Middle East maps. I am not
only thinking about Hamas, till not
long ago, there was a certain ambiguity
also in the palestinian leadership of
Arafat, who, maybe for a long time, allowed that in the palestinian children’s
school textbooks there were maps of
the Middle East without the Israeli
State, or the same refusal to use the
term “ Israel”, whenever they talk
about their political opponent. I think
that such attitudes shall be given up, in
view of a peaceful and political solution of the conflict. Israel is an historical fact, and a strong reality. Palestinians are a very active people, their education rate was and still is very high,
and it has produced sophisticated
minds, and it has a traders class consolidated during the centuries. Being in
some ways a people that could play a
leading role in the arab-islamic Middle
COPPEMNEWS
east, from an egoistic point of view, it
is important and in palestinian people’s
interest that the Israeli State does not
disappear, because it is the only possible driving force for the economic development of the middle-eastern area
we are talking about.
Which is the basic limit having
marked the international diplomatic
initiatives in the israeli-palestinian
conflict?
In my opinion there are two limits: the
first and probably the most important
one, is that the United States are the
only real mediator in the area, because
it is the only nation to have the economic power and the military resources to driving both the parts to the
negotiating table, and forcing them to
come to an agreement. United States
are also the only actor which can place
its resources at the parts' disposal, in
order that such an agreement can be
enforced, observed and ensured. United States’ action is inevitably clashed
and it keeps on clashing with the needs
of the foreign policy adopted in the
FEBRUARY 2005
Middle East. If, for example, we think
over the last four years, the first Bush
junior mandate, the idea under which
the road to peace that should drive to
Jerusalem, necessarily gets through
Baghdad, it means that the first mandate of Bush’s administration in some
way have based its foreign policy on
the israeli-palestinian problem, on the
assumption it was impossible to negotiate with the palestinian leader Arafat,
in the light of the past exeperience,
and for this reason the problem should
have get round by starting from a precondition, or the problem will be
solved only when the Middle East will
progressively go through a democratization process.
Do you think the European Union
could be another potential mediator?
We go back to first limit I talked about.
If the action of the only reliable mediator, the United States, has been obstructed by the foreign policy which
the americans have adopted, or rather
it clashed with american foreign policy
needs, the second action pattern is
that of other potential mediators, first
of all the Eu, but I consider it an ineffective one, because it is unreliable.
These actors, the Eu in particular, till
now, and maybe in a future of mediumlong period, did not provide the parties
with resources for achieving the respect of the agreements, not so much
at economic as political and military
level, because as everybody knows it
was the main financial backer of the
palestinian Authority. Another question which marked the international
diplomatic initiatives, is consisting of
extremely complex problems deriving
from the fact that, to get two states solution, it is necessary share out the territory. This division, in a small plot of
land so much rich of memories, symbols, and of historical-sentimental results for both the involved parties, is
very difficult.
Do you consider that wall an action
of expropriation of palestinian people’s lands or a security barrier for
the israeli people?
I am not completely against or sceptical about the wall, because in this
phase it is more than a necessity. The
only thing I consider questionable as
well as objectionable is its course, but
there is a remedy, as it has been done
through some judgments of the
Supreme Court. The wall cannot be an
instrument of abuse of power, and humiliation of the palestinian people at
all: there is the real problem of the
check points and difficulty of movement which could be eased with a
change of its course. And at the same
time the essential need of security of
the israeli people can not be ignored,
as it is a basic need for every national
State: respect, security, defenceless citizens life protection. The wall in itself
is not a problem, but if it brought
13
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
about a crystallization in a situation of
discrinimination as well as humiliation
towards the palestinian people it would
be a problem.
Which strategy should be adopted in
order to find a solution to the territories problem as well as to the security one?
For many years the israelis have been
said, and that is quite trustworthy, to be
willing to give peace for their citizens
security, and on the other side the
palestinians answer they can give security for land, therefore it is quite like a
vicious circle, we come back to previous question. I think that, from a purely ideal point of view, the set route to
break down such a heap of problems is
the rootedness of a trinomial in the
area at issue, consisting of democratization, human rights safeguard and economical development. It is a long-period prospect, and it will be not easy to
put that into practice, so much so that
the awkward attempt carried out by the
american government, of realising it at
gunpoint by imposing the democratization and liberalization, the opening of a
country such as Iraq, brought about
those results which are under everybody's eyes. Considering the present
situation of the international system
this is the set route; in the long-medium period it will be necessary a phase
of separation between the two political
entities of the two people. Forcing a
possible integration of palestinians and
israelis under the same roof, in a single
state or in two different states which
can be soon confederated or federated,
seems to me too early.
Do you think that, through a consolidated and well-established peace strategy, a synergy between the israeli and
palestinian intelligence services can
be originated for defeating terrorism?
14
From a purely theoretical point of view
we could think that it would be, even
now, in moderates as well as middleclasses of both parties’ interest to reach
a prospect like that. Furthermore just
on the bases of the considerations we
have just talked about which are realistic and disenchanted condiderations on
the present situation, I think that working out an intelligence cooperation is a
far ahead prospect. I would settle for a
benevolent cohabitation in a shorter
period, and especially that on palestianian side some ambiguities and connivances between the palestinian Authority and terrorist groups be reduced.
A turning point can be, after the recent
palestinian elections, the overcoming of
certain past ambiguities. I think also it
is the most important thing on which it
should be staked in the immediate future, but all depends not only on the
will as well as on the actions carried out
by both the two counterparties and
their allies but also on the global policy
evolution in that area and in the international framework as well.
Which role could the States play in
the middle-eastern area in the future
geo-political setup?
An very important role. I would focus
on four or five Countries. A decisive
role will be played by Iran for three
main reasons. First for the problem
concerning mass destruction weapons;
everybody knows that Iran is carrying
out a plan for atomic energy production, even though it is a big oil producer. Iran justify this plan with needs
of scientific nature for the energy production, but it not so much trustworthy. All the observers actually know
that Iran wants to take the countermeasures against their adversaries
which are already nuclear powers,
starting from Israel. Israel in fact being
particularly worried about Iran, has already put pressure on the United
States which could increase in the
next months in order that the iranian
question can be faced up. Together
with the problem of mass destruction
weapons development in Iran there is
also another problem concerning the
COPPEMNEWS
PARENT’S CIRCLE
Ten years agoYitzhak Frankenthal, when his son Arik died, in order to react to his pain founded the parent’s circle, by joining about ten israeli
and palestinian families who lost their children in the vicious circle of middle-eastern violence. Since than till today the families joining that forum
are more than five hundred, from Tel Aviv to Gaza, all the parents victims of terrorist attack having palestinian hallmarks, or victims of the Israeli
soldiers fire. The Parent’s circle also thought up telephone calls “from the other side” (they are called Hello Peace), to let these two communities
communicate with each other and in order to show that there are not only gunshots and explosive belts, but also people who is able to listen in
memory of their children and peace dreams.
evolution of its political regime. In the
last years there were growing ferments
directed to the democratization of the
theocratic regime, but also about this
issue we must put a question mark.
What the future will keep us it is not
very clear, many things will depend on
the development of all this area.
There is also to be considered the role
that Iran plays outside its borders, such
as Country which was in touch with
terrorist organisations which have
played an important role in the israelipalestinian conflict. I think especially
about the action of Iran towards the
Ezbollah group, which is one of the
great historical antagonist as well as a
bugbear of Israel, this is an essential
element in the years to come. The second Country on which I would focus is
Iraq: the stabilization process, depending on the more or less positive or ruinous results, will have direct effects
on israeli-palestinian conflict. In the
end I would consider another two
Countries: Turkey and Syria. Turkey
that is a very solid traditional ally of
FEBRUARY 2005
Israel, as well as of West in general, is
a country representing a pillar of the
Atlantic Alliance, in this moment
very interesting because it is a ground
of a real experimentation for the possible development of an islamic-moderate government form. From the results of this experimentation will depend many things concerning the
middle-eastern policy evolution. As
for the twofold actors, such as Syria
and Lebanon. Syria is one of the
Countries included in the list of the
robber states, drawn up by the last
twoamerican governments, not only
by Bush’s government. Syria has a new
leader, the young Bashar Assad, who
succeeded a leader whose politicaldiplomatic ability was recognized all
over the middle east as well as all over
the world. In this moment it is a country representing a question mark, as it
is hemmed in a terrible vice because
Israel occupies Golan, and Turkey
with which it always is in very bad relations and Iraq, occupied by american
troops. I think that it couldn't have
been any worse for a Country going
through a delicate transition phase
with a new leadership. Tied up to the
syrian problem there is the lebanese
one. Lebanon as well as Turkey is another very important experimentation
ground, because it is a Country which
had been gone through about 15 years
of civil war and now it is trying to rebuilding hardly a cohabitation between the islamic and christian community, the maronite and druse ones
and the other minority religious communities. Many things will depend on
the development of this second middle-eastern experiment. Syria has a direct military presence on the libanese
territory that is a Country under syrian
guardianship. There is also the possibility that Lebanon can pay a very high
price if the international terrorism
problem having islamic fundamentalist origin should worsen. Therefore
even though it seems a small and marginal Country, it is another joint for
the outcomes of the middle-eastern
policy development.
(g.c.)
15
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
EUROPE, IF YOU ARE HERE, SHOW US A SIGN
The vice president of Coppem calls the Eu for its mediator function
General Assembly of Palermo, from left Gadallah, El Fayyumi, Hussein
by Adly Hussein
Governor of Qalyubiya (EG), Vice President of
Coppem
Middle East area is considered one of
the most tension and disorder areas in
the world for many years. Perhaps the
weak role of the European Countries
helps to deteriorate the situations in
the Middle East area, especially the
Mediterranean countries and their proscription to play the supposed role they
must play to help the sides of the conflict in the area and achieve the fair
peace and apply the U.N decrees in
this course which were issued at the
first with the agreement of these European countries.
These countries left all the problem's
papers in the hand of one great country
alone which didn't achieve any important progress till now, even more it
failed to apply "Road Plan" which it released itself about the Palestinian Problem.then it failed to afford security for
Iraqi people after getting rid of the for-
16
mer government. This led to mess instead of peace ,and terrorism instead of
safety not only among Middle East
countries but also many countries all
over the world. It isn't accepted any
more to let Europe away of this issue
and contents with dependency to the
upper hand of the only great country in
the contemporary world, and not to
start to give hand to impose justice and
peace values. It's noticed for everybody
that the world isn't safer any more after
all the military actions which carried
out 11th of September attack, and terrorism hasn't been finished.
I think this goal is still away as the feeling of injustice and inequity prevail
the area. All fair political annalists in
the world assure that the stability and
safety of the world are connected with
justice in dealing with the peoples cases and their legal rights. The return of
the world's safe and stability will be so
far if the injustice and forcing and forgetting the legal rights of peoples are
still continually. Violence actions and
Terrorism will be doubled to destroy
peoples' hopes in development and
getting rid of poverty and illness.
The hoped comprehensive development won't be achieved unless we get
security and peace for the peoples of
this area, and security and peace won't
be achieved unless there's equality between them as well as ending the injustice which affects on the Palestinian
People and ending the occupation of
Iraqi People.
No doubt that establishing the Palestinian independence sovereign State as
soon as possible beside the Israeli State
will achieved the hoped goal for the
stability of the area , and any delay to
achieve this important step leads to
more violence and destructions. What
makes things get worse in the Middle
COPPEMNEWS
East is that some great countries are
going to establish a law aiming to protect individuals of a certain religion
and not other religions in the world
and this create a reborn conditions of
antipathy among peoples in the area,
as it devotes the feelings of eminence
and discrimination foe a communion
belongs to a certain religion over the
rest of the world.
This is the noxious discrimination
which is against all the principals of
justice and equality which are subscribed in all the contemporary international documents. So all the efforts
should be done to promote the dialogue and understanding among peoples of the Middle East area. On one
hand the meetings of dialogues between religions and between civilizations should continue, on the other
hand there should be mutual projects
for development and providing job opportunities and promote the cooperative efforts done by people of the area
to fight all types of violence after
achieving justice and peace in the current conflict areas.
I am sure that Coppem - after it joined
members from north and south cities
and from countries in the conflict area
in the Middle East and after it afford a
quiet condition for dialogue as well as
fruitful debates in the framework of
equality concept, cordiality and the
wish to develop the participated societies. Coppem can - within Barcelona
Declaration - be a strong catalyst agent
to reach the goal of peace in the Middle East and expresses truly about the
hopes of people to live together a better live.
We don't deny that what mentioned
previously isn't enough for the necessity of achieving the reform in Middle
East countries to protect the hoped
FEBRUARY 2005
peace . The economic reform occurs by
comprehensive sustainable development for the peoples of the area, and
the political reform occurs by promoting democracy , freedom and human
rights in a framework of a national program for each country which isn't
forced from abroad, or we will return
back to the beginning of the road without achieving any important thing.
17
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
POLICY AND SECURITY
ARE THE KEYS FOR DIALOGUE
We report the text of the speech by Hon Chris Patten of the 12th October 2004, that is an important evidence about the policies carried
out on the middle-eastern question. The speech itself seems to be the
platform from which the Commission should proceed for a more detailed initiative, necessary to contribute to a peace process in that tormented region.
by Chris Patten
commissioner at the european Parliament
I imagine, provided there is no divine
intervention, that this is the last
speech I will make in this house, certainly on the Middle East. I have lost
count of the number of debates that
we have had on this subject since I
took office. On a sensitive issue like
this, it is only natural that our exchanges have sometimes been a little
difficult – I hope they might have
been some use. I certainly hope they
18
haven’t done any more damage. As I
approach the end of my life as a Commissioner – I underline as a Commissioner, I have started going to the theatre again. And I went recently to a
new interpretation by an admirable
Irish playwright, Frank McGuiness, of
Euripides' play Hecuba. Classicists
among you, or theatre goers among
you, may recall that it is a bleak and
bloody drama of death and hate and
revenge. And perhaps all too suitably
in this production, the backdrop to
the stage was a tall black wall inscribed with names. They were the
COPPEMNEWS
names of the Israelis and the Palestinians who have died in the last few
years. Hatred and revenge and blood.
And it’s certainly true that looking
back, despite the heroic efforts of my
friend and colleague, the High Representative, and others, we can alas report scant progress. We saw just the
other day, as the High Representative
pointed out, the dreadful massacre of
Israeli tourists in Egypt. And time and
again, one hope after another has
been dashed. We had Camp David, we
had Taba and the understandings
there, we’ve heard from Mitchell,
from Tenet, from Zinni... all to no
avail. Indeed since the Camp David
Meeting, since the outbreak of violence after Taba, the sombre balance
FEBRUARY 2005
is that 4,360 people have died on both
sides, 1,026 Israelis and 3,334 Palestinians. An eye for an eye, a tooth for
a tooth. As Gandhi said, after that
everybody finishes up blind. Innocent
children, for innocent children.The
latest initiative we have on the table
is Prime Minister Sharon’s ideas for
unilateral disengagement in Gaza.
Obviously, any steps towards the
withdrawal from occupied territory,
albeit limited, is welcome. But there
are, as the High Representative pointed out, many questions that need to
be clarified, not least in the broader
context of the Road Map. Although
we have our reservations, this initiative does foresee the beginning of the
removal of settlements, an important
aspect and in line with what we have
been saying for a long time. So, we are
prepared to give it a try – though we
have to be clear, as the High Representative said, that the parties will
follow the five elements which the
European Council has set for the plan
to worout of the bag.Over the period
of my mandate, I have tried, with I
think the support of the majority of
the Parliament, to build a reformed
Palestinian Authority, capable of governing Palestine in due course, and
capable of negotiating and reaching a
settlement with Israel. During that
period, the Israeli Government has
been seeking to marginalize President
Arafat himself. But at the end of the
day, President Arafat is still there,
19
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
watch-tower in Qalqilia
while unfortunately the Palestinian
Authority itself has been battered to
pieces. I accept that President Arafat
might be part of the problem, but he is
20
not the only problem. What I’ve always been clear about is that a reformed Palestinian Authority is part
of the solution. It is not clear whether
the Palestinian Authority, under current circumstances both internal and
external, is in much of a position to
deliver on a two-State solution. The
deadly combination of too little action on the Palestinian side and perhaps too much action on the Israeli
has pretty successfully destroyed most
of the authority that the Palestinian
Authority might have had. So, we
need to find a way to give the Palestinian Authority more political room
and to do so in return for cast iron
guarantees on security and reform.
The High Representative noted the
work that we’ve done in general to
support economic development, as
well as institutional development,
and humanitarian relief in Palestine.
This Union has done far more than
anyone else, this Parliament has voted for and supported far more assistance than anybody else has provided, and I guess this Parliament is going to start to ask itself some searching questions about the continuation
of assistance on the present scale. Let
me make one obvious point, we’re the
biggest supporters of the World Bank
Development Fund for Palestine.
When I say we’re the biggest supporters, it’s an understatement – hardly
anybody else is putting any money in
at all. And what we want to see is
that money used to lay the foundations for an economy in the Palestinian Territories, which can provide
jobs, which can provide revenues,
which can provide at least a modicum
of economic growth so that people
can live a better life with greater dignity and a greater chance of a job and
so on. I think we are all entitled to set
to ask whether that money will be nugatory expenditure, whether that
money will be worthwhile. Unless we
COPPEMNEWS
can get certain guarantees from Israel
about its withdrawal from Gaza,
about the way that’s going to be handled, and about its medium- and
long-term prospects, I don’t think the
Parliament would want to feel that
we were simply paying the costs of
the consequences of whatever the Israeli defence forces did. So I do think
we have to make it clear that our role,
the role we want to play, in helping to
support reconstruction must be dependant on a real political dialogue
with the Israeli authorities otherwise
I’m afraid the money will simply be
wasted as too much of what we’ve
done already has been. I repeat, that
working on the basis of the report by
the Council on Foreign Relations,
working on the basis of the work
which was initiated by Mr. Rocard
and his colleagues on that Council,
we have done more than anyone else
to put in place reformed institutions
in Palestine, and I salute the work of
people like Mr. Salam Fayyad, who
has been bravely trying to ensure that
FEBRUARY 2005
Palestine has a decent and transparent government. But I have to say,
that without political progress, without an improvement in the security
situation, without a more effective dialogue with Israel, it’s going to be incredibly difficult to continue to justify that sort of help and that sort of
expenditure. I don’t think there’s a
more important problem facing the
international community than this
one. Both because of the continuing
bloodshed that it produces unresolved, but also because of the damage
that it does to the relationship between the West and the Islamic
world. Nobody should be in any doubt
at all about the impact of the struggle
between Israel and Palestine, the impact that that has on attitudes in the
Islamic world. I think we have to
work even harder to try to shape the
parameters of a solution to this bloody
conflict. If we don’t succeed in that,
then to return to what I think is that
last line of Euripides' Hecuba, “Fate
compels and none can resist”. Bloodshed after bloodshed after bloodshed.
Revenge after revenge after revenge.
Unless people in Washington, in Europe, but above all in Israel and Palestine have the political courage to try
to actually try to deliver what their
people deserve and what the whole
world requires.
21
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
THE DIPLOMACY PERFORMED ON THE GROUND
Nemer Hammad, representative of the Pna in Italy, enhances the peculiar role of local authorities
Nemer Hammad, Pna representative
Y
asser Arafat death, the election of
Abu Mazen, and a new awareness of
a great many of the israeli people, the
new Sharon’s government, the second
mandate of George W. Bush, and the
pursuit of a common foreign policy by
the European Union, are all occasions
that are not to be missed for building up
a dialogue based on self-determination
principles as well as on human rights
and security respect. Which is the Npa’s
point of view? We talk about this topic
with the national palestinian delegate
in Italy, Nemer Hammad, in an attempt
to drawing the possible future scenarios
for a peaceful solution of the islaelipalestinian conflict.
22
For many years you have been close to
Yasser Arafat. What did represent
Arafat for his people and which were
his own merits?
Yasser Arafat not only was the palestinian people’s leader, but he was above all
the symbol of its cause for self-determination. Under his leadership, for more
than 40 years, the palestinian cause has
been known internationally, while before the birth of Al–Fatah in 1964, it was
just a refugees problem. He had many
merits, but the most important one was
that of having spent all his life for the
palestinian people. I think Arafat will go
down in history as one of the greatest
leader to have driven the most difficult
struggle of the twentieth century.
Which possibilities has Abu Mazen to
achieve those objectives that Arafat
did not realize?
Together with Arafat, Abu Mazen
founded Al- Fatah, but today, as it was
in the past, achieving the objectives for
a solution of the isreali-palestinian conflict on the basis of UN resolutions,
which recommended two separate
States, respectively Israel and Palestine,
especially depends on the serious efforts
of the international community. Abu
Mazen has immediately started the enforcement of his programme for the unification of the police force, but during
the truce there were not any change
from the Israelis who continued to carry out their targeted killings as well as to
annex further territories. For this reason
Usa, Eu, Russian Confederation and
Uno, must intervene to achieve a solution of the conflict.
Do you think that Israel and Palestine
will resume the negotiations? And in
this framework which is the role that
Europe could have?
Negotiations can be resumed, but both
the parties are not able to solve all the
aspects of this conflict by themselves,
and of course Europe plays a crucial role
as mediator and arbitrator, both at political and economic level.
Will be the Npa’s President able to
reach an agreement with the various
palestinian factions?
When Abu Mazen was a minister, more
than a year ago, he was able to come to
an understanding, that all the palestinian movements obeserved, for no less
than 52 days, but that truce ended because Israel kept on doing targeted
killings. Today Abu Mazen has reached
a new agreement with the various palestinian groups, he has sent palestinian
police forces in the Gaza Strip as well as
in Israel, but there are not enough signals for stopping military actions from
the israeli government and army as yet.
Therefore for the agreement, it is necessary to observe such a truce also on the
israeli side.
Do you think that the international
community has been developing an alternative option which can be suitable
for this dramatic situation?
We hope the international community
takes part in the Road Map implementation. I don’t think we need new initiatives, it is enough the implementation of
the agreements formerly reached.
How could Coppem, which represents
the European as well as the Mediterranean cities and regions, give a contribution to the peace cause?
I think that also the diplomacy performed on the ground can give a contribution. From the Barcellona Declaration in 1995, the governments involved
in the euro-mediterranean partnership
had envisaged a future of cooperation
and free market, but connected to the
peace achievement. Peace should be an
effort of everybody, governments as well
as local authorities and people. (g.c.)
COPPEMNEWS
CITIES AND REGIONS
ACTORS OF THE PEACE PROCESS
by Avi Rabinovitch
Israeli representatives of Coppem
FEBRUARY 2005
Four years of unstable situation in our
region did not interfere the strong cooperation between the Union of Local
Authorities in Israel (ULAI) and
APLA (Association of Palestinian Local Authorities). In 1999 ULAI and
APLA signed in Barcelona the first cooperation Agreement. This historic
agreement led to a very intensive cooperation in various fields. Unfortunately,
the situation in our region is not allowing us to work directly with our partners
and we need the support and good will
of a third partner to act as a mediator,
facilitator and donor, to implement
ideas an projects and transforming initial initiatives into an operating
process. We are overwhelmed by the
support and engagement for peace from
our partners in Europe, mostly national
organizations, cities and regions from
Italy, Greece, The Netherlands, and
France. The decentralized cooperation
and the GLOCAL attitude brought international institutions to support the
peace initiatives between APLA and
ULAI and to initiate very important
projects of cooperation for peace. The
World Health Organization (WHO) is
coordinating a project between seven
cities from Israel, Palestine and Europe
in subjects of health and welfare. UNESCO and the EU together with the
Tuscany Region are leading a project
between Israeli, Palestinian and Italian
cities in the subject of cultural heritage
and tourism. The Oslo Agreement
failed to realize its goals as it overlooked
the grassroots level. The Local Authorities are building dialogue through the
cooperation in the fields of youth, culture, local leadership, environment, water, sustainable development tourism.
The decision makers and municipal
leaders are the key elements for building
trust through dialogue, which is the
main goal in the work of ULAI and
APLA. In order to maintain and
strengthen this cooperation and present
a different future for Israelis and Palestinians, ULAI has formed a Peace Initiatives Team which is examining potential lanes and paths to ignite from
the field level a process of gaps reduction between Israelis and Palestinians.
We believe that the very positive relations between both bodies can encourage other countries and municipalities
from the Arab neighboring countries,
especially in the Mediterranean area, to
join us in creating projects of municipal
affairs and in this way be the signal for
their governments to enter into talks of
peace. The establishment of Coppem
and the possibility to bring under the
same roof European, Arabs and Israelis
could be a very important instrument
for creating personal contacts, which
are not possible in any other case, and
develop new channels of discussions. If
Local Authorities will work together
the peace is not beyond the horizons, it
is touchable.
23
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
THE PATH OF GOOD WILL
Interview with Osama Al Farra about the peace prospects in M.E
Osama Al Farra, Mayor of Khan Younis and palestinian representative of Coppem
Following his election of Abu Mazen
as President of Npa declared: We are
not able to solve the conflict without
talking with each other and negotiating. We know it is not easy, but it is
not impossible. How do you consider
this signal of good will?
24
The Palestinian people do believe in
solving the Palestinian – Israeli conflict. This has to be through negotiation
channels between the two parties. President Abu Mazen's announcements after his election; emphasis to the Israeli
people and to the international community that there is no other alternatives,
but the peaceful solutions through negotiations to this problem for both nations. Negotiations are the strategic
choice for the PNA and this is a clear
declaration to return to the negotiation
table. But for these announcements
have to be face the same concept from
the Israeli government. And both parties have to be convinced that the solution of this conflict comes only through
one channel; dialogue and negotiations.
This is the first and main step towards
peace if both parties are convinced with
the peace idea to cut the road back on
extremists in both sides.
In sharm el Sheikh summit palestinian
president Abu Mazen, and the prime
minister Sharon declared themselves
COPPEMNEWS
in favour of the ceasing of fire. How
do you consider this new phase?
I believe the announcements and the
results of Sharm El-Sheikh between
President Abu Mazen and the Israeli
Prim Minster Ariel Sharon to cease all
kind of violence between the parties;
the Israeli daily aggression on the
Palestinian people and the violent acts
inside the Israeli territories will be the
first step toward creating new atmosphere in returning to the negotiation
table which is the only path to peace.
Meanwhile, it gives the impression for
both Palestinian and Israeli communities that violence, killing and destruction will not bring peace to the region,
but will bring more pain and suffer to
both nations. Therefore, we see that
the decision of cease fire and all kind of
violence if implemented on the ground
and abide with; it will be the start of
new era between the parties to spread
peace on the ground.
As Mayor of Khan Younis, in the Gaza
Strip. Which role will be able to have
local authorities for achieving peace?
FEBRUARY 2005
As a mayor in the Gaza Strip; I believe
that there is a great role of the Association of Palestinian Local Authority in
achieving peace in the region through
enhancing the peace concept in the
area and its reflection on local communities; whether, concerning security, development or creating a local supportive opinion toward peaceful solutions.
The local authorities may proceed in a
parallel peaceful solution with political
solution to create a new horizon between Palestinian Local Authorities
and the Israelis to support dialogue on
the political level.
There are the necessary conditions for
opening the negotiations on the final
status of Palestine. What the international Community can do?
Concerning the role of the international community to create new atmosphere
to start talking and negotiating of the final solution; I believe that the international community shall be more deep in
the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; not only
on the political issue, but also to return
to the negotiating table. Also it can
play the mediator role between the two
parties; mainly concerning the issues
which were postponed to the final solution whether the issue of Jerusalem, the
refugees, borders or the settlements.
The international community can enhance the agreement chances on these
issues whether the political side or the
economical side which will facilitate to
reach peace in the region.
At now do you still believe in Road
Map?
I believe the Road Map is the most acceptable agreement for implementation
and peace can be achieved in the region. For that to be successful, both
parties must benefit from this agreement not one side only and both parties
have to comply with the commitments
of the Road map; so that the Palestinian
and the Israeli communities feel the
positive impacts which lead to just
peace for the two countries.
(g.c.)
25
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
THE WALL OF CONTENTION
Defensive barrier or hindrance to cohabitation?
Since almost two years the Israeli government has been built a wall around
the West Bank and Jerusalem as well, in
order to prevent that palestinian
kamikazes can blow up themselves in
Jerusalem or Tel Aviv streets. This defensive wall, called by the Palestinian
people “apartheid wall”, will radically
change both the geographical and political landscape in the Middle East (600
km counter to 350 km of the green
line).An early wall was formerly built
around Gaza in the days of the first Intifada, 1987-1993, and Israel encircled
that strip of land with an electrified and
hermetically sealed barrier. It enabled
Israel to keep its authority on the sixteen jewish settlements and at the same
time to control palestinian people
movements. At present, Israel keeps under its control the 20% of Gaza, forcing
its 1.2 million inhabitants to live in
three separate districts. According to
the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the defensive barrier will envelop the city of
Jerusalem but in order to incorporate
the hole city for christian, jewish and
moslem people, Israel will be forced to
annex on the western side of the wall
the densely populated settlements of
Maaleh Adumin, Givon and Har
Homa. The plotted course should also
assure to Israel the annexation of
Rachel’s Tomb, which is an holy place
also for the Moslems. Hebron would
have the same lot, where the Holy
Places of the city are supposed to be
placed on the southern side of the wall.
However Israel is going to consider the
possibility to redraw the plotted course
still under construction in order to
reach the American support as well as
to reduce the palestinian people involved which are about ten thousand.
In particular, premier Sharon announced that his government is going
26
Air view of Qalqilya (september 2003)
through the reduction of the wall extent of about 100 km.
According to Palestinian sources, the
idea that the defensive wall around the
West Bank can ensure peace to Israeli
people, is rather doubtful. On the contrary it is sure that it will further stifle
the already weakened palestinian economy. According to many Uno’s ana-
lystes, that defence measure, aimed at
preventing suicide attacks, will effectively forbid thousand Palestinians to
work in Israel, and those earnings necessary only for the sheer survival at now
are not allowed. As it has happened in
Berlin, only wall demolition will contribute to the rapprochement of these
two communities.
• The works of the new wall started in june 2002 near the district of Zububa city, in the extreme north of the West Bank, and in july 2003 the northern sector reaching a little further southwards the city of Qalqilya was completed.
• The wall will have a length of 600 km counter to 350 km of the green line. It is 8 metres
high, encircled by moats and barbed wire meshes, with control towers every 300 metres.
Along the plotted course bypassing roads only for settlers, and 41 farm passages were built
as well as 9 check-points for pedestrians and vehicles. For the realisation of this northern stretch
of road the 1,6% of the West Bank has been included, in which there are 11 settlements,
where 19.880 israelis and 10 thousand palestinians live.
• The total cost of the operation is one million dollars for kilometre.
• When the wall will be completed, from the northern West Bank to Jerusalem, the jewish state
will have annexed the 7% of the West Bank, among which 39 israeli settlements and about
290.000 palestinians, 70.000 of them officially have not the residence right in Israel and
therefore they are not entitled to travel or benefit from israeli social services.
• In the last two years the number of suicides is decreased.
COPPEMNEWS
COMPARING
DIFFERENT OPINIONS:
United Nations. On october 22nd 2003
with 144 ayes, 4 nayes and 12 abstentions, Uno General Assembly approved
a resolution condemning the wall that
Israel is building in the West Bank. Israel
is requested “to put an end to the building of the defensive barrier in the palestinian occupied territories because it is
against the international laws”. However
since that resolution is not a binding
one, it does not stop Sharon’s government in going on with the works.
a protection against terrorism, but it
could be taken as a political choice”.
Abu Mazen. During the meeting held in
the White House with palestinian prime
minister Abu Mazen on july 25th 2003,
George W. Bush defined such a wall as “a
problem”. The following is what he said:
“the mutual trust between palestinians
and israelis is very difficult with a wall
going through the West Bank”.
Ariel Sharon (israeli prime minister).
“The barrier is only a further way for
fighting against terror – israeli prime
minister stated in an interview with the
Washington Post on last november – it is
not a political barrier, nor will it be used
to set our future borders”.
Yasser Abed Rabbo (together with Yossi Belin is the author of the Agreement
of Geneva). In an interview with the
italian newspaper L’Unità Yasser Abed
Rabbo, member of the Plo’s executive
committee stated: “the realization of
the apartheid wall shatters dialogue
hopes and drops any negotiated settlement to the israeli-palestinian conflict
based on two-state solution. What we
intend to put into action is a large-scale
political and diplomatic campaign
which considers among its options also
an unilateral proclamation of the Palestinian State”.
Shimon Peres (Nobel prize for peace
and President of the israeli labour party). In an interview with the italian
newspaper La Repubblica on july 6th
2003, the nobel prize, Shimon Peres,
stated that “the creation of wall between israelis and palestinians makes
The United States. US National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, during the
meeting with Israeli leaders held on 29
june 2003, had an hard confrontation
concerning with israeli prime minister
Ariel Sharon about the the building of
the wall along the West Bank. In Rice’s
opinion, “building that wall represents
Israel’s will of establishing unilaterally a
political border with the future Palestinian State. Even though we know that is
FEBRUARY 2005
27
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
the things difficult and brings about a
standing problem. As well as it has been
planned, including palestinian parts, it
looks like an annexation”.
Pope John Paul II. In Sunday Angelus
on the 16th of november 2003, John
Paul II talked about the wall that Israel
has been building in the Holy land. The
Pope repeated his “strong condemnation of every terrorist act carried out in
the Holy Land in recent times. And
said he lamented the fact that unfortunately the dynamism of peace seems to
have stopped in that area. The construction of a wall between Israelis and
Palestinians is seen by many as a new
obstacle on the road to peaceful cohabitation. In reality, the Holy Land
needs bridges, not walls. There can be
no peace without reconciliation. May
those in positions of responsibility have
the courage to resume dialogue and negotiations, thereby freeing the road towards a Middle East that is reconciled
in justice and peace”.
Red Cross. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on the last
28
18th of february stated that the West
Bank barrier, as far as its route deviates
from the “Green Line” into occupied territory, is contrary to international humanitarian law.
Likud. Inside Ariel Sharon’s party there
are also representatives against the construction of the wall because it could be
in the future the border between the israeli and palestinian States, thereby dissolving the dream of Heretz Israel. Moreover, many israeli settlements turned out
to be outside the wall protection and
therefore they cannot be protected.
Israeli people living on the border.
Many israelis, who live in the neighbouring area of the wall under construction,
are very worried because, in their opinion, the defensive wall will cause a deterioration in the relations with the neighbouring arab people. Doron Liber, secretary of the kibbutz of Metzer, in an interview with the newspaper Haaretz did not
make a secret his doubts.
Elie Wiesel (survived Auschwitz and
Nobel Prize for peace) declared himself
in favour of the construction between israelis and palestinians. “Unlike terrorism, the separation did not cause anybody’s death at most it saved a lot of people. This is its objective”. (Corriere della
sera, 11/16/2003)
Avraham B.Yehoshua (israeli writer).
The israeli pacifist writer, Avraham
B.Yehoshua, author of innumerable stud-
COPPEMNEWS
ies about the cohabitation between israelis and palestinians, is in favour of the
building of a wall as frontier between
these two peoples. But Yehoshua thinks
that Israel has to dismantle all the settlements in the West Bank because they are
“a real abuse for palestinians”. (La Stampa, 29 june 2003)
David Grossman (israeli writer). “The
wall represents israeli people need to feel
safe and sheltered by a solid barrier. But
it also represents Israeli people behaviour, which uses or try to use through
force instead of the dialogue for achieving solutions. A border between us and
the palestinian people shall come out
through an agreement rather that
through an imposition”. (La Repubblica,
13 August 2003)
Hanna Nasser (mayor). “Palestinian
cities have become big prisons. In
Betlemme we spent a lifeless Christmas,
without joy”.
Ehud Gol (ambassador of Israel in Italy).
The Ambassador of Israel in Italy, in an
article published on the Messagero newspaper on the 13th of february 2004,
FEBRUARY 2005
writes that his Country “for taking steps
towards peace needs to feel safe, it is necessary that the israeli mothers are no
longer distressed when they say goodbye
to their children going in the school-bus,
without knowing if they will come back
at evening. Just to avoid this continuous
endless stream of innocent blood – Gol
says – Israel is forced to build a defensive
barrier. Not a wall, but an anti-terrorism
barrier. The results achieved with the
first part of the barrier already built show
our reasons. In one year terrorist attack
have almost halved”.
Aia Court. The international Court of
justice of Aia, Uno’s judicial body, established in a judgment published on the
9th of july 2004, that the israeli executive must dismantle the defensive barrier. That wall violates the international
law, and it is no legal. According to the
judges of Aia, the israelis shall pay some
compensations to the palestinians whose
properties has been confiscated in order
to build the wall. Israel shall also “ensure
free access to the holy places which are
under its control”. In the document the
Court contests the defensive thesis of Israel, namely that the wall have been
building up for reasons of self-defence
from terrorist attack. The court declare
to be not convinced that the direction of
the wall which Israel have chosen take
to the realisation of its objectives in security field. The Court also defended its
authority and stated to have jurisdiction
over the question, through an historical
and legal of the situation in Gaza and
West Bank. Whereas the construction of
defensive barriers inside the green line,
that is the israeli border before 1967, has
not been contested. But Aia Court decision is not a mandatory one. Judges opinion is only a consultative advice.
European Commission launched an appeal to Israel for it removes the wall from
the Territories, “including the stretch inside and around East Jerusalem”. It has
been notified by spokeman Jean
Christophe Filori. For the european
Union the deviation of the wall course
from the green line is a serious reason for
clash and it make the solution of two independent states almost impossible.
For the government of Jerusalem the
construction of the wall is the only way
to stop kamikazes. Whereas for the palestinian people and international community it is a great prison under the open
sky. The only breach in the wall can be
created by policy. Only negotiations
which would bring about an epoch-making turning point could make the barrier
construction superfluous. Sharm el
Sheikh Summit, on the last february,
ended with the twofold responsibility
undertaking of both leaders Ariel Sharon
and Abu Mazen, who welcomed the
“birth of a new era”. Maybe both the
leaders have set the first brick in building
the future peace, with no barriers. (g.c)
29
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
CITIZENS OF JERUSALEM
Interview with Monsignor Liberio Andreatta, ORP general director
by Giovanna Cirino
Peace can be done and sometimes diplomacy also gets through simple gestures.
From this statement of fact, in the last
months, “solidarity pilgrimages” organised by the O.R.P, Roman Pilgrimages
Institution, have been created, in order
to launch a clear message to those who
live in the Holy Land: “You are not
alone, we do not leave you.” Coming up
with a friendship and solidarity bridge
towards two peoples suffering the aftereffects of a situation which seems to be at
a standstill since two years and, more
than anything else, for stating that “in
the Holy Land there are not two peples
in war, but they live the tragedy brought
about by terrorism and its after-effects”.
We have met Monsignor Liberio Andreatta, Orp’s general director, 62 years
old, native of Veneto, who also organised
“football matches for peace”. Sometimes
even sports can help to create the thaw
as well as the conditions for dialogue.
Which role plays the Church in building peace in a torn land as the middleeastern one is?
Church has always played a bridge and
dialogue role. I think that in the middle
eastern torn land, the Church plays a
role for a feasible meeting among all the
communities, ethnic groups, cultures
and especially different religions. The
driving force deriving from Church is
the Gospel’s force: for christians Jesus
Christ is the fundamental and essential
law. The law of love, “love your enemy”,
has a great power in comparison with
the old law “an eye for an eye, a tooth
for a tooth”. Any christian never has
become a kamikaze, and this because
christian culture does not consider the
30
idea of revenge or retaliation. In Middle
East the presence of Church and the
role it plays are basic.
There is a recent news about the lightning kidnapping in Iraq of a bishop,
Monsignor Casmoussa. Church is always in the front line, and close to
people living in a conflict. How can we
react to violence and terrorism?
All the world was surprised about the
news of the kidnapping, especially the
christian world, because it seemed to be
impossible that a catholic bishop, could
be object of kidnapping by ideological,
political and religious forces. It couldn’t
be anything else but an ordinary crime
act, with a different gamble, because
everybody thinks highly of the Church
and it is considered a pacification, cohesion and great dialogue element. I believe that we can not react to violence
with love and forgiveness. There is a very
important difference among christianity,
islam and hebraism, and this thing is the
law of forgiveness. This is one of the elements lacking in the islam and partially
also in the hebraism. This is our power.
Love will win and it will win with forgiveness, because if we will not able to
become reconciled, we won’t be able to
forgive, and there will always be reasons
of revenge. In this dreadful war everybody is damaged from both the sides,
every family mourns for a dead or
wounded person, each one experienced a
loss. If we pursue the way of violence and
revenge, we never achieve peace. Violence brings about violence, and hatred
brings about hatred. Forgiveness brings
about forgiveness, and therefore love.
The middle-eastern conflict is particularly important because it involves different religions and it is considered a
decisive one for the future of the human beings.
It is necessary to affirm very strongly that
wars do not come out from religious conflicts; but they come out from power,
economic and political conflicts. The
causes and reasons of tensions are different and they can not be traced back to religious reasons. But religion have been
used, to create hatred among people,
which becomes convinced that is necessary to defend its own religion, thereby
people innocently does not realize that it
is a whopper, and that it have created a
game in which people is used and manipulated for other aims, for power processes
not involved with religion. I think over
my experience in Lebanon: I have seen
how many christians were used, fomented and conviced that the war was a civilization and religion war. It is easy to incite the people to religious fanaticism and
talk about holy war. Considering its effects, some wars can look like conflicts
among different religions, but the wars
are always caused by other reasons. I believe that for achieving peace, the
catholic church aim, together with the
other religions, is that of dialogue, exchange and respect of what is different.
COPPEMNEWS
Pope Wojtyla, has met all the leaders of
the other faiths in his various meeting in
Assisi and Rome, and all them proclaimed peace as their final aim and way
to give a future to the human beings.
Thinking about Jerusalem and its symbolic value. “There will be not peace on
earth, as long as there will be not peace
in Jerusalem”, it was many times
stressed. Taking our place in the midst
of the conflict tearing the holy city for
jewish, christian and muslim people.
Policy and religion, which co-operation?
From a spiritual point of view I was born
in Jerusalem, and I consider myself its
son, as Abraham’s son, common father of
jewish, christian and muslim people.
One of the meanings of Jerusalem is “city
of peace”, the city that God loves, and to
which God gave everything, beauty, wisdom as well as sorrow, which keeps up
with the other life values. City of love
and sorrow, then, if there will be love in
Jerusalem, there will be love in the
world, if sorrow will win in Jerusalem, so
it will be all over the world. I strongly believe that this city is the navel and the
basic heart. The problem is that jewish,
christian and muslim people is “condemned” to live together in this city,
then they are “condamned” to make
peace. The difference between policy
and religion is very difficult, because in
the islamic world there is a theocratic
idea of history: faith, policy and state coincide with each other, a little bit like for
christians in the Middle Ages. We get rid
of such a thraldom. The second difficulty is the reciprocity concept, according
to which each one thinks to be a one and
only subject, the only one having suffered, or having the right. But everybody
has to ask for forgivness, and the greatness of this Pope is just that he had the
courage to ask for it. The truth does not
lies only on one side, but it should be
FEBRUARY 2005
built and worked out together. I tell you
an episode occured in Jerusalem: in the
area of Mount of Olives, near the desert
of Judas, in a village, thanks to the
painstaking work of a few wise persons,
the reconciliation between two very
powerful chiefs who were at war since
many years took place. For the occasion
a great feast was organised, but just when
the two chiefs were hugged each other,
one of them drew his knife and thrust it
into the other’s heart to take revenge.
The courage for forgiving missed.
How to answer to the continuous trials and sufferings that the people who
is victim of a conflict which still today seems to have no way out has to
undergo?
I went to Middle East since 35 years and
I have thought up a slogan: where the
mind of men seems to have been unsuccesful, we hope that diplomacy actions
will be not unsuccesful for pilgrims’s
heart and legs. When a country is at war
the first act is closing the borders, then
imposing a curfew, tourists cannot get
through, nobody can go in, road traffic is
stopped. I wanted to take pilgrims with
me on mission in these dangerous areas,
in order to let the people of Holy Land
worked out they are not alone, we can
still hope, peace can be around the corner. This is the message: you are not
alone. This is the mission: not let them
alone. If hotels, restaurants, small artisan factories are closed, also local economy comes to a standstill and a part of
the country dies. Hunger as well as
poverty prevail and here are the
kamikazes, which can not be justified,
but they are poor madmen with no future. The 96% of palestinians live under
the poverty threshold. We have to fight
against this despair and give them hope
again. Here is my call: let’s go there,
there are no dangers, a hair of the pil-
grims who went there even during the
war or Intifada never be touched of their
head. Evidently they love us, and can
not harm us because we are part of their
family, and therefore of their life.
Challenge is your job. You have said
mass at North Pole, in the heart of
Antarctica, have planted the Pope’s
cross on the Mont Blanc and soon also on K2. But the real challange you
want to win is another one: to take
peace in the Holy Land. Does a new
way of diplomacy begin through pilgrimages, and with which results?
I can say with very good results. In this
moment there are more than 200 happy
and extremely pleased pilgrims of Acli,
welcomed everywhere with citizens’ band.
We give our joy and economic supports,
but in that area a smile is highly regarded
than money. People wants to live in peace
with its work. I tell you a fact: once I was
in a hospital and I offered a doll to a little
11 years old palestinian girl coming from
Betlemme. She asked me: Where do you
come from? Is there peace in your country? And then please bring me peace”.
And she gave me back the doll.
“Peace is not avoidable” Giorgio La Pira stressed, or better still “it is the horizon promised by God”. Do you think
that in the middle-eastern region, like
somewhere else, the research of peace
can follow traditional ways or it shall
follow absolutely original paths?
All the ways which can bring about peace
must be undertaken. Diplomacies have to
spend all their efforts to work and communicate to the utmost. We have to take
the pilgrims over the zones in conflict, in
order to talk with people. And well, considering that who speaks is a man of God,
I think about the strenght of prayer. All
the men of faith have to believe in
prayer. God is the real peace. God is the
way, the truth, the life.
(g.c)
31
PEACE IN MIDDLE EAST
GLOSSARY
attack that obliges the organization to
move. It will find shelter in Tunis. At the end
of the 1960’s the success of al-Fatah upsets
the PLO, of which it becomes the majority
faction within their group. In 1969 Arafat
assumes the presidency of the executive
committee of the PLO and since then the
members of al-Fatah constitute the majority
within the Palestinian institutions.
AL-FATAH. the party led today by Marwan Barghutii. The word is the acronym in
reverse order of Haraka at-Tahrir al-Filastini,
Palestine Liberation Movement. Al Fatah is
the greatest among the Palestinian guerrilla
movements. Yasser Arafat established the
organization in 1959 when he was in
Kuwait. The aim of the movement was the
restitution of the Palestinian land through the
guerrilla against Israel, still maintaining full
autonomy as to the Arab countries, which,
in the eyes of the al-Fatah leaders, had already shown their incapacity and ambiguity in the war of 1948. The first guerrilla action against Israel occurred on January
1965. No Arab country supported al-Fatah
tactics for fear of possible attacks by Israel.
The six-day war, started in 1967, makes a
hero of Arafat and a point of reference of
al-Fatah for many people who joined up its
ranks. At the beginning, the organization
settled in Jordan then, expelled by king Hussein, moved to Lebanon. Here, al-Fatah
carved out a niche for itself till it seized
wide territories in the South of Lebanon,
from the early 1970’s, in the zone known
as Fatah Land. In 1982 Israel launches an
32
PNA. The Palestinian National Authority.
The Anp was established following the
Washington Agreements (1993), the Cairo
Agreements (1994) and the Taba-Oslo II
Agreements (1995) for managing the Territories passed from Israel to the Palestinians.
Before the Intifada, the Anp used to control
20% of the surface of Cisjordan and Gaza
(zone A, including the main cities), while
20% (zone B) was under a joint IsraeliPalestinian administration. At present, the
situation has deeply changed.
ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS. In the past, they
even might have had strategic functions but
nowadays they represent, for the Palestinians, another form of humiliation. As suggested by Shimon Peres, a complete withdrawal
from the Gaza Strip, where few colonists exploit approximately 40% of water resources,
can be an excellent starting point. In Cisjordan it is more difficult but the guide principle
to refer to is that the future Palestinian State
will have to be an adjoining land and not divided up into many zones.
JERUSALEM. holy city for the Jewish, the
Christians and the Muslims; whatever negotiation on Jerusalem has to take that into
account. From 1948 to 1967 the city was
divided into two parts: the Eastern side with
the ancient city to the Arabs, the Western
side to the Jewish. During this period the
Jewish were not allowed to visit the Wailing
Wall to pray, Jewish cemeteries were profaned and the gravestones were used for
constructions. In 1967, after the six-day
war, Israel also conquered the Eastern side
of Jerusalem. The Muslims were allowed to
visit the Esplanade of the Mosques to pray.
HAMAS. Hamas means "ardour" but is also the abbreviation of Harakat al-Muqawama al-Ilamiyya, Islamic underground movement, established in1988 in the days of the
first Intifada by Ahmed Yassin. In order to understand Hamas ideology, we need to refer
to the Egyptian organization of Muslim Brothers, born in the 1920’s of the last century. In
fact, the radical Islamism of Hamas have its
historic ideological origins in the Egyptian organization, which used to combine the religious action to the political one in order to Islamize the society for reaching the establishment of an Islamic State ruled by the Shari’
a. Hamas has never wanted to join Olp; on
the contrary it aspired to replace it. After the
outbreak of the first Intifada, the movement
was officially established drawing up
(1988) a statute of 36 articles that included
policy, methods and objectives of the move-
COPPEMNEWS
ment. In the same year, in Algeria, the Palestinian national Council announced, symbolically, the creation of a Palestinian State in
Cisjordan and in the Gaza Strip, indirectly
recognizing the right of Israel to exist. From
the statute of Hamas clearly emerges that no
compromise is possible with the State of Israel because Palestine is considered a territory extending without any block from the
Mediterranean to the Jordan river. Hamas
donates a great part of its money in charitable activities that are for the most financed by
associations of Arab and Muslim countries
and even by USA and European associations. Israel argues that terrorist attacks in Israel are financed through these charity organizations. On the other hand the Jihad, in
the statute of Hamas, is considered a duty for
each Muslim. The article 31 reads that
Hamas "is a humanistic movement dealing
with human rights and committing itself in
keeping Islamic tolerance as to the other religions disciples”. On 26th April 2004, after
the Israeli targeted assassinations against
Yassin and Rantisi, Doctor Mahmoud Al-Zahar is the new leader of Hamas, and Ismail
Haniyeh is appointed his assistant.
HEZBOLLAH. The party of God – It
emerged as a political and military force in
the early 1980s, with the aim of fighting
against the second Israel’s invasion of
Lebanon. According to its Manifesto, the Islamic resistance units are fighting "for the
liberation of the occupied territories and the
ejection of the aggressive Israeli forces".
Their leader is the sheik Hass an Nasrallah,
a Shiite priest. The guerrillas have received
ideological and financial assistance from
Iran, and have been denounced by the
USA as a terrorist group.
INTIFADA. The first Intifada (1987-1994)
has seen children in the front line throwing
stones as rebellious act; it seemed to be a
non-violent rebellion and assumed the shape
FEBRUARY 2005
seats out of 17. The Palestinian national
Council, which includes more than 400 delegates of the Territories and of the “Diaspora”, represents the legislative power of the
Plo and includes officially 88 deputies of the
legislative Council of the Anp.
of economic boycott against Israel. Such revolts urged Israel to the negotiating table of
Oslo in 1993. But the agreement didn’t return the Palestinians their legitimate rights,
whilst gave Israel the opportunity of continuing to construct new settlements and to extend
the exiting ones. The rift was inevitable. On
28th September 2000, Ariel Sharon presents
himself escorted by thousands of agents in
one of the holiest places for Islam and Judaism: Temple Mount for the Israelis, Esplanade of Mosques for the Muslims. One of
the failure reasons of Camp David was just
the issue of holy places. As a sign of protest
against that gesture, the Palestinians demonstrated. The second Intifada had begun.
PALESTINIAN REFUGEES. since 1948
millions of Palestinians have been obliged
to live in the refugee camp as expelled from
Tzhal during the first Arab-Israeli war. Only
Jordan gave to exiled people the citizenship and right to work, while the other arab
countries allowed only partial rights, by using ther situation, for using them as a blackmail weapon against Israel. At present, the
best solution for refugees is the one conceived by the agreements of Geneva.
JIHAD. Often wrongly translated as “holy
war”, but it means “fight, effort made on the
God’s track”.
NAKBA - CATASTROPHE. . The word
coincides, for the Palestinians, with the establishment of the Israeli State in 1948.
PLO. Palestine Liberation Organization,
the common house of Arab movements. The
Plo was established in 1964 and has been
managed until 2004 by Yasser Arafat. It includes the main Palestinian organizations
except for the Islamic ones. Nevertheless,
within the executive Council, Fathah - the
party of Arafat – prevailed, occupying 5
SHOAH. The extermination of six million
Jewish is crucial for understanding the elaborate Middle-Eastern matters since it provided the survivors with a cosmic desire that
is to ensure a certain life, for themselves, in
a Jewish state.