What is the Root of the Conflict?

Palestine Center Brief No. 178 (15 June 2009)

By Samar Assad

"In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?" This was the question Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu asked and answered in his 14 June 2009 speech at Bar Ilan University near Tel Aviv. While unsurprisingly his response was incorrect, it gave a clear indication that his approach to the peace process would be at odds with the Arabs and the majority of the international community.

A lack of understanding or intentional disregard of the root cause of the conflict--Israel's 42 year military occupation and illegal settlement of the Palestinian territory--means that there will be a lack of understanding of the true requirements for the "new era of reconciliation" he spoke of and most importantly, an unwillingness to take the steps outlined by the international community and previous bilateral and multilateral agreements that are necessary to bring a true end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

The simple truth is that the root of the conflict was and remains Israel's military occupation of the West Bank (which Netanyahu referred to as Judea and Samaria), the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and Sheba'a Farms as well as the denial of the outstanding historical grievances of 1948.

As for recognition, the Palestinians have recognized Israel's existence on 78 percent of their historic homeland while Israel is yet to recognize the fundamental rights and freedom of the Palestinian people. Furthermore, the Arab Peace Initiative (API) offers Arab recognition of Israel. Netanyahu's call to Arab leaders to "let us speak of peace and make peace" is a misleading statement by someone who failed to engage the API. As for Netanyahu's prerequisite that Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state, the simple truth there is that that is a precondition to negotiations designed to prejudge a major final status issue, the Right of Return. His goal to circumvent this issue is clearly stated in his speech when he said, "There must be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel's border."

In his speech, Netanyahu removed another important final status issue, Jerusalem. "Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel," Netanyahu said. Jerusalem is an Arab and Islamic issue, and Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem will not bring the regional peace Netanyahu claims he wants to achieve.

The speech showed disregard for international law, existing agreements and the direction of a new beginning that has been adopted by U.S. President Barack Obama. Netanyahu has clearly stated that his government will continue on the path of dictates rather than negotiations, control rather than partnerships and wars rather than peace.

It’s difficult not to notice that the structure of Netanyahu’s speech is similar to that of President Obama's Cairo speech. If Netanyahu is so keen on emulating Obama, the best way to do so is to adopt Obama's call for a new beginning based on an "effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground."

---

Samar Assad is the executive director of the Palestine Center. This policy brief may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Center.

The views expressed in this information brief are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Jerusalem Fund.

read more...

Info Brief: Obama Won Hearts, Now It's Time to Win Minds

Palestine Center Brief No. 177 (8 June 2009)

By Samar Assad

In his 4 June 2009 speech in Cairo, President Barack Hussein Obama won the hearts of Muslims and Arabs with his acknowledgment of civilization's debt to Islam and emphasis on the "common principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings." The president's call for a new beginning based on an "effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground" as well as his ease with quoting the Koran drew genuine applause. From the reaction to the speech, it seems that President Obama had won his audience, those in the Great Hall and beyond, at "As Salamu Alaykum." But now comes the hard part, winning their minds with a policy on Israel and Palestine that will not be swayed by the domestic concerns for survival by either government.

The task won't be easy. President Obama and his top diplomats made statements on Israeli settlements and Palestinian statehood that he and his administration cannot retreat from. To have the administration's position on settlements clearly articulated in a speech that was designed to signal a new beginning and with an overall theme that "in order to move forward, we must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts and too often are only said behind closed doors," means that nothing short of a settlement freeze would be a failure for President Obama.

A principled U.S. position on settlements is not something that Israel is accustomed to and not surprisingly, soon after President Obama's speech, Israel announced that its prime minister, Benyamin Netanyahu will deliver a policy speech. The Israeli strategy to dealing with a United States that now acts like a diplomatic superpower which recognizes the legitimate aspirations of two peoples rather than one; that expects both sides to respect agreements, international legitimacy and to live up to their mutual responsibilities, will have to be a strategy that goes beyond the unchanging argument that if you push Israel too much, its fragile government coalition will collapse. While this has worked in the past and U.S. policy has been tweaked to accommodate the internal coalition concerns of Israeli prime ministers, this may not be a consideration for an Obama administration. In a recent conference call with a state department official, it was clear that the U.S. will not accept this argument and that it expects all leaders to manage their governments. Amjad Atallah, the director of the Middle East Task Force in the New America Foundation, worries that Israel's strategy will be to short-circuit the United States. Atallah explained that Netanyahu, to deflate U.S. pressure off of Israel, may invite the Palestinian Authority to bilateral, back-channel negotiations, similar to those of the Oslo talks.

Should Israel's strategy to deflate U.S. pressure fail, the question remains, how will the U.S. deal with Israel's refusal to stop settlement expansion? Will there be consequences for Israel? The answer to that is most likely being debated behind closed doors, not yet ready to be said openly. However, whatever that course of action will be, it will have to remain true to the spirit of the Cairo speech.


Samar Assad is the executive director of the Palestine Center. This policy brief may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Center.

Views expressed on this post or on linked web pages do not represent the Palestine Center, the educational program of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development. All content is for educational purposes only.

read more...

Interview with John Ging, UNRWA

Samar Assad, the Executive Director of the Palestine Center, spoke with John Ging on 1 May 2009 about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Ging is the head of the United Nation's Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in the Gaza Strip. He has been in this position since 2006.

Ging called the humanitarian crisis in Gaza "man-made." He said aid agencies had the funds to ameliorate it, but do not have proper access to Gaza.

Listen:



Download (mp3)

Views expressed on this post or on linked web pages do not represent the Palestine Center, the educational program of the Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development. All content is for educational purposes only.

read more...

A Durable Ceasefire Requires an End to the Siege and Occupation

Palestine Center Information Brief No. 171 (9 January 2009)

By Samar Assad

Overview: Since the start of the December 2008 Israeli military assault on the Gaza Strip, the most often asked question has been how to achieve a durable ceasefire. Pundits have given various answers to that question, most of which revolve around the same point—a durable ceasefire can only be achieved once Israel destroys Hamas’s military capability—and for some, the definition includes the elimination of Hamas’s role in Palestinian politics. This narrow approach which takes into consideration the interests of only one side and avoids the root causes for the continued violence is why a durable ceasefire remains elusive.

A sustainable and durable ceasefire starts with an immediate halt of Israel’s military offensive against the 1.5 million Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip and the opening of the Rafah border crossing, a legitimate and secured crossing, to allow uninterrupted passage of medicine, food, fuel and people rather than the forced reliance on underground, unmonitored tunnels. Diplomatic talks, which must include Hamas recognized as an elected political party, should focus on lifting the 18-month old siege, not the easing of the siege.

Siege, Ceasefire and War: Civilians Still at Risk

Israel’s December military offensive, the mounting Palestinian civilian death toll and the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure has forced the international community to deal with a part of the world that has been deliberately ignored despite an unprecedented humanitarian blockade that has inflicted a significant erosion of livelihood, damage to infrastructure, essential services and death.

According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), since the June 2007 blockade, the daily lives of most of the 1.5 million Gazans have been consumed by basic tasks such as collecting and storing clean water and searching for food, fuel and medicine as well as other essential supplies.

Since June 2007 and during the six-month ceasefire, Gaza’s largest commercial crossing, Karni, has been closed. All exports and most industrial/non-humanitarian imports were suspended, and the amount of fuel allowed entry was severely reduced. There has been an almost total closure of the Rafah crossing point, the only passenger crossing with Egypt; a ban on movement of Palestinians through Erez, the sole passenger crossing with Israel and the West Bank; and a reduction in the sea area which Palestinian fishermen can access. As a result, Gaza’s sole power plant was operating with a 41 percent electricity shortfall, leaving the residents of Gaza City, including hospitals, without power for 16 hours daily. The lack of power affected the water and sanitation systems, which has caused health concerns. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 80 percent of Gaza’s water supply does not meet their standards for drinking.

On the level of health services, since the imposition of the blockade in mid-2007, the quality of health services has been drastically affected. Critical medical equipment became obsolete due to the lack of power, spare parts and maintenance. Stocks of essential drugs became short in supply. According to OCHA, over one third of applications for permits to leave Gaza for medical treatment were denied by Israel.

According to Physicians for Human Rights, 200 patients died while waiting for permits in the past year. WHO attributes at least 20 such deaths, in a two-month period, to the fact that patients could not leave Gaza for treatment.

Israel’s 2005 Withdrawal from Gaza

Some have argued that since Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005 Gaza has become a launching ground for rockets on Israeli towns, and the threat emanating from Gaza had to be dealt with. According to a December 2008 article in the Washington Post, eleven Israelis were killed by rockets from Gaza since Israel withdrew in 2005; this does not include the number killed as a result of the current round of rocket fire, which is 12 Israelis. According to Human Rights Watch, during 2006, Israeli forces fired some 14,000 artillery shells into the Gaza Strip which killed 59 Palestinians, almost all of them civilians. In all, OCHA has documented the death of 1,290 Palestinians by Israeli forces between 2005 and 2007, 222 of which are children.

Other Significant Figures

According to the Israeli Human Rights organization B’Tselem and OCHA, from September 2000 to July 2007, at least 5,848 people were killed directly or as an indirect consequence of the conflict. Of those killed, 4,228 are Palestinian; 1,024 Israeli and 63 foreign citizens. A total of 971 children were killed between September 2000 and July 2007. Of the overall number of children killed, 88 percent were Palestinian and 12 percent were Israeli. According to Defense for Children International, in 2006, 31 percent of the Palestinian children killed were 12 years or younger. The group reported that the majority of the children died as a result of injuries sustained to the head, chest or to multiple parts of their body.

An End to Occupation is the End to the Conflict

Many have argued that there is no military solution to this conflict, just as laying siege to 1.5 million Palestinians is not the solution. Only an end to the occupation in a manner that provides Palestinians with real freedom over their lives, land and future can there be a durable, sustainable ceasefire.

Samar Assad is Executive Director of the Palestine Center. This information brief may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Center. The above text does not necessarily reflect the views of The Jerusalem Fund.

read more...

One Year after Annapolis

Palestine Center Information Brief No. 168 (13 November 2008)


By Samar Assad, Executive Director of the Palestine Center.


Overview: One year after Israelis and Palestinians reaffirmed their commitment to their obligations under the Road Map for peace at a U.S.-sponsored international meeting in Annapolis on 27 November 2007, Israeli settlement activity, the demolition of Palestinian homes and military checkpoints in the Occupied Palestinian Territory have increased. A report released by the Palestinian Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) details the Israeli violations and lists other serious infringements that took place since the November 2007 Annapolis Conference.

READ MORE

read more...