See what MODERATES can do in the Mid East!

Imran Siddiqui · November 17, 2003, 17:26

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/16/opinion/16FRIE.html

Quote:

Wanted: Fanatical Moderates
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: November 16, 2003

You know when I really get mad? It's when my wife tells me I'm not helping around the house — and I have not been helping around the house. There is nothing more enraging than someone exposing your faults — and being right.

What is true at home is true in diplomacy. I was reminded of that watching the enraged, hysterical reaction of Israel's ruling Likud Party to the virtual peace treaty — known as the Geneva Accord — that was hammered out by Yossi Beilin, the former Israeli justice minister, and Yasir Abed Rabbo, the former Palestinian information minister. Mr. Beilin and Mr. Abed Rabbo, with funding from the Swiss government, decided to see if they could draw up a detailed peace treaty, with maps, at a time when their governments were paralyzed. After three years, they did it. They shook hands on it Oct. 12 and today they are mailing copies in Hebrew and Arabic to every home in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.

Ariel Sharon and his far-right coalition threw a fit, crying treason and sputtering about the gall, the "chutzpah," of Mr. Beilin drawing up a virtual peace treaty with Yasir Arafat's deputy. The Likud's over-the-top criticism of Mr. Beilin — and of the Israeli Army chief of staff when he pointed out the Sharon government's reluctance to strengthen Palestinian moderates — had all the earmarks of a ruling party that knows it has not washed the dishes, not made any creative initiatives for peace since coming to power, and hates being exposed.

The Geneva Accord fleshes out the peace initiative first outlined by President Clinton. You don't have to accept every word to see its basic wisdom and fairness: In return for peace with Israel, the Palestinians get a nonmilitarized state in the West Bank and Gaza. They also get the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but under a permanent international security force, with full Jewish access. The Israelis get to keep settlements housing about 300,000 of the 400,000 Jews in the West Bank (in return for an equivalent amount of land from Israel), including virtually all the new Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem built in the Arab side of the city. About 30,000 Palestinian refugees get to return to their homes in Israel proper, and all refugees receive compensation. Polls show 35 to 40 percent of Israelis and Palestinians already support the deal, without either government having endorsed it.

"Our agreement is virtual, because we are not the government and do not pretend to be," said Mr. Beilin, whose deal was co-signed by a former Israeli Army chief of staff, a former deputy Mossad chief and leaders from Mr. Arafat's Tanzim militia. "But we need to create a virtual world that will impact the real world by demonstrating that a workable deal is possible. It is inconceivable that for the past three years there have been no official meetings between Israelis and Palestinians about a permanent solution."

By 2010 or so, there will be more Palestinians than Jews living in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza put together. "We will fairly soon be losing the Jewish majority," added Mr. Beilin. "This may not interest President Bush, but it interests me and should interest Sharon. If we don't do something to create a border with the Palestinians, we're going to put an end to the Zionist dream."

What I have always admired about Mr. Beilin is that he is a fanatical moderate — as committed to his moderation as the extremists are to their extremism. In a Middle East where extremists tend to go all the way and moderates tend just to go away, the example that he and his Palestinian partners are setting is critical. It shows that civil society in Israel and the West Bank is still alive and refuses to give in to pessimism. But they need, and deserve, courage and help from America now too.

We owe them that. We owe ourselves that. Because the same struggle is afoot in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, where extremists have been intimidating moderates, by going all the way — by blowing up the Red Cross, the U.N. and fellow Muslims. We can train all the police we want in Iraq or around the Arab world, but unless we can strengthen moderates there — those ready to act on the hopes of the intimidated majorities — a decent future will be impossible.

So moderates of the world unite! We have nothing to lose but our pessimism. Either we make the future bury the past, or the bad guys will ensure that the past buries the future.

Get these guys in power and lets get this deal done

.

DinoDoc · November 17, 2003, 17:39

Quote:

Polls show 35 to 40 percent of Israelis and Palestinians already support the deal, without either government having endorsed it.

Gah! Make the deal you idiots!

Imran Siddiqui · November 17, 2003, 17:41

Unfortunetly Sharon is accusing Beilin of treason and Arafat probably won't listen to Abed Rabbo, in both cases because the 'virtual' peacemakers weren't properly authorized.

laurentius · November 17, 2003, 17:44

I hope it works...

DinoDoc · November 17, 2003, 17:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Arafat probably won't listen to Abed Rabbo,

The sky is also blue.

Imran Siddiqui · November 17, 2003, 17:49

At least ignoring a former minister is better than calling one treasonous for participating in a 'virtual' peace negotiation. I wonder if Sharon is going to crack down on schools who hold mock peace arbitrations

.

The diplomat · November 17, 2003, 17:58

I am so tired of people saying that there would be peace if only Israel were more "moderate", if only Israel compromised more. The truth is that many of these guys were in power, and they offered almost this exact same plan, and Arafat rejected it!

The problem is not with Israel, the problem is with the Palestinians!

Imran Siddiqui · November 17, 2003, 18:01

Quote:

The truth is that many of these guys were in power, and they offered almost this exact same plan, and Arafat rejected it!

Then why is Sharon blabbering on about how much of a traitor Beilin is?

The fact of the matter is that it does give more concessions than that Clinton plan. First, it gives Palestine control over Arab East Jerusalem settlements (the Clinton plan did not). It exchanges settlement land (given to Israel) for Israeli land given to Palestine. And MOST important is allows about 30,000 Palestines right of return (compensation for the rest).

Buck Birdseed · November 17, 2003, 18:02

Yes it's clearly the palestinians building a wall around Israel and keeping an army dedicated to harassing its population. And all those horrible Palestinian settlers wrecking the peace process, nasty stuff.

MichaeltheGreat · November 17, 2003, 18:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Unfortunetly Sharon is accusing Beilin of treason and Arafat probably won't listen to Abed Rabbo, in both cases because the 'virtual' peacemakers weren't properly authorized.

Actually, in both cases because it undermines the true agendas of the two *******s who deserve each other, Arafat and Sharon.

MichaeltheGreat · November 17, 2003, 18:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Yes it's clearly the palestinians building a wall around Israel and keeping an army dedicated to harassing its population. And all those horrible Palestinian settlers wrecking the peace process, nasty stuff.

Hey, have suicide bombers regularly blowing themselves up on buses and in restaurants and markets where you live, and let's see what you'd do about it then.

Buck Birdseed · November 17, 2003, 18:39

Cause and effect reversal, meet Michael the Great. Oh, you two seem to be well acquainted already, I'm sorry.

The fact is, the continual and planned humiliation and harassment of the entire palestinian nation by the IDF was going on decades before the first suicide bombings happened. Now they just provide a somewhat convenient excuse for said activity.

Ben Kenobi · November 17, 2003, 19:03

Quote:

By 2010 or so, there will be more Palestinians than Jews living in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza put together.

This is why the right of return will be the dealbreaker.

SlowwHand · November 17, 2003, 19:18

Moderates. The voices of reason.

Imran Siddiqui · November 17, 2003, 19:24

Quote:

it undermines the true agendas of the two *******s who deserve each other, Arafat and Sharon.

I wonder what level of Hell they are consigned to

.

Quote:

This is why the right of return will be the dealbreaker.

and also why Israel needs to make a good deal ASAP.

GePap · November 17, 2003, 19:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

This is why the right of return will be the dealbreaker.

That will be true without any right of return, which is why Israel, for all it's military might, is the one fighting against time. Right now they can pull of jewish and democratic..but not for many decades more...when they will have to decide for one or the other.

Sandman · November 17, 2003, 20:18

I dunno. Will this deal lead to a Palestinian state that isn't as convoluted and fragile as a snowflake?

Grandpa Troll · November 17, 2003, 23:43

Grrrrr

I feel like "SUCH AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!

I saw the thread title and being a little tired.I thought it said "see what the MODERATORS CAN DO IN THE MIDDLE EAST!

and I am thinking..Solver

Ming

MtG and UR as well as RAH..well maybe his name may get him "out" of trouble

But 4-Real..I was thinking

"Man, these guys may a wee bit out of their limits of authority"

Then I am thinking more deeply..

Perhaps with the "All-Knowing" attitude sometimes displayed by the Mods here..just perhaps after all the great minds have had a wack at diplomacy maybe what we need is a Tight-@r$e Moderator to come in and straighten things out..

I could just see it now...

First all these morons here (yeah U guys know whom you are!!) complained about Gitmo prisoner detention center...I cannot wait to see people complain about the conditions at either

SOLVER-HALL

or even

~gasp~

~shudder~

MING-A-PULCO!!!

I mean I been there and it aint pretty!

Say you havent been there?

Well..just watch Midnight Express and thats like the welcome center for both facilities....

The Big Turkish gaurd..

I am not sure if that was based on a depiction of Ming or not but surely if the Middle East had to deal with the likes of these folks then we could have a lot more civility!

Take the deal?

I say Take it and be nice play nice in the sandbox and remember

OT Forums is a great place to play and enjoy the Moderators, for if they were to play in our World but RULE in your World then we would not have as many problems as their are!

Peace

Grandpa "Not-The-Governor-Elect-of-California-sworn-in-today"-Troll

Gatekeeper · November 18, 2003, 04:48

Moderates are A-OK in my book.

Bosh · November 18, 2003, 06:59

Sounds like the fairest deal I've ever heard of on this issue. Needs to address water rights though...

Zevico · November 18, 2003, 07:35

Right...because this has worked SO MANY TIMES BEFORE WITH YASSER ARAFAT AND COMPANY.
Wake up, people. The PA education system consists of hatred against Israel and Jews; the PA media consists of hatred against Israel and Jews; everything about Israel and Jews is utterly, completely vilified, including its right to exist at all.
Palestinian schoolbooks praise "martyrs" while at the same time, Yasser Arafat says he wants peace. The two are mutually exclusive, in my not so humble opinion.
Yasser Arafat is incompetent at leading a small amount of territories, funds terrorist organisations, is corrupt, and yet people still want to talk to him or the PA.
The Geneva Initiative might have been a good idea, if none of this were true, if Yasser and his henchmen (and his henchmen did sign this) were really good guys at heart. A quick look at the facts should show otherwise, however.

Zevico · November 18, 2003, 07:41

As to your claim that moderates actually exist on the Arab side, they are, to my regret, untrue. Dear Leader Yasser controls the PA in its entirety, and though opposition to Yasser is tentatively allowed, it is followed by gunmen coming by the house of the opposition and firing AK 47 rounds. Thus moderates simply cannot exist, for they are stamped out by the majority of the organisation. Which is another point--anyone in the Palestinian territories that wants recognition of Israel's existence is a heretic; anyone who does not want a future Palestinian state "in theory" in Israel is considered as a far right winger. Sharon and the Likud are right wing, but not far right. Even far right, however, respects the right to live of Arabs, unlike the radicals (and I 'daresay' the moderates) of the palestinian poltical arena.

Zevico · November 18, 2003, 07:51

Quote:

The fact is, the continual and planned humiliation and harassment of the entire palestinian nation by the IDF was going on decades before the first suicide bombings happened. Now they just provide a somewhat convenient excuse for said activity.

Edit for clarification (and politeness, no doubt):
Suicide bombings are not the only form of terrorism, Buckseed. Before suicide bombers could be used, infiltrations into Israeli territory occurred MANY times: the War of Attrition is the probably the most prominent string of examples. Thus your claim is incorrect.
Furthermore, even assuming that what you say of deliberate harassment and etc by the IDF is true (and I personally disagree):
1) Terror attacks occurred before the IDF had the run of any Palestinian civilian population.
2) Even so, the most Palestinians could do according to their very argument is to attack soldiers and the military. Though the military has been occasionally been targetted during the Intifada, the vast majority of attacks have been of a terrorist nature-ie. specifically against civilians.

Quote:

Yes it's clearly the palestinians building a wall around Israel and keeping an army dedicated to harassing its population. And all those horrible Palestinian settlers wrecking the peace process, nasty stuff.

Firstly, the wall is to protect the Israeli civilian population from terror attacks. I personally would prefer it a few people lost their farmland over a few people losing their lives. As for the settlers, they are the least of the peace process' problems. If it were a matter of settlers, then the issue would long be over, or at least there would be no intifada, in my opinion.

Also, the journalist in the article stated that Yossi Beilin was a fanatical moderate. This is incorrect. Yossi Beilin is regarded by the Israeli public mainly as a left/far left/delusional politican (depending on how far your views go). But he is certainly not a moderate. I think that this sheer ignorance of Israeli politics alone should make any other opinion this journalist has on the ME (or at least Israel and the the conflict b/w Israel and the Palestinians) totally irrelevant.

Arrian · November 18, 2003, 10:33

Sounds like a decent plan. There have been several decent plans generated in the past. The basic outline of a deal has been pretty clear for a while. It's actually DOING it that seems to be impossible for either side's leadership.

Which is all the more upsetting, of course.

-Arrian

The diplomat · November 18, 2003, 10:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Sounds like a decent plan. There have been several decent plans generated in the past. The basic outline of a deal has been pretty clear for a while. It's actually DOING it that seems to be impossible for either side's leadership.

Which is all the more upsetting, of course.

-Arrian

Actually, I think this plan is the worse, most irresponsable, and most dangerous plan yet. Israel would surrender way way too much!

Arrian · November 18, 2003, 11:07

Quote:

In return for peace with Israel, the Palestinians get a nonmilitarized state in the West Bank and Gaza. They also get the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem and sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but under a permanent international security force, with full Jewish access. The Israelis get to keep settlements housing about 300,000 of the 400,000 Jews in the West Bank (in return for an equivalent amount of land from Israel), including virtually all the new Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem built in the Arab side of the city. About 30,000 Palestinian refugees get to return to their homes in Israel proper, and all refugees receive compensation.

Giving up too much? Please.

-Arrian

Az · November 18, 2003, 11:36

I sort of like the deal, though I don't like a bunch of factors in it:
a) We're making a deal with the PA? that's great. What about Hamas and IJ?
b) I am sort of fearing that the palestinian on the street isn't getting the full picture. A similar deal that had No right of return whatsoever, and return to the 67' borders, aka Ayalon-Nuseiba, has been rejected, completely so. I don't think that the 30-40k people can change this.

time will tell, I guess.

Edan · November 18, 2003, 17:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

The truth is that many of these guys were in power, and they offered almost this exact same plan, and Arafat rejected it!

Then why is Sharon blabbering on about how much of a traitor Beilin is?

The fact of the matter is that it does give more concessions than that Clinton plan. First, it gives Palestine control over Arab East Jerusalem settlements (the Clinton plan did not). It exchanges settlement land (given to Israel) for Israeli land given to Palestine. And MOST important is allows about 30,000 Palestines right of return (compensation for the rest).

Actually, you're incorrect (or at least misleading):

The Clinton plan gave Arabs sovereignty over one neighborhood in East Jerusalem, as well as administrative control of all Arabs in Jerusalem.
The clinton plan did have have a swap for land (although I'm not sure if that swap is different now than it was before), and the Clinton plan did allow for a number of Palestinians to enter Israel for "family reunification" (as well as compensation for the rest) in order to completely end the right of return issue - indeed, I think th enumber being proposed was somewhat higher than 30,000 (maybe 50k?) - but the right of return has become far less an important issue now that polls have shown that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians don't want to "return".

OTOH, this plan makes Israel give up Ariel, IIRC, so it gives slighly more to the Palestinians than the Clinton proposal (although I very much doubt Ariel was a deal breaker).

In the end, it seems like a reasonable (if not perfect) plan. Assuming it ever goes anywhere, and that the Palestinians are capable of dismantling the terrorist groups.

chequita guevara · November 18, 2003, 17:42

I posted about this months ago.

Imran Siddiqui · November 18, 2003, 19:57

Quote:

As to your claim that moderates actually exist on the Arab side, they are, to my regret, untrue.

So I made up Abed Rabbo?

He was a former information minister for the PA, as well.

Quote:

anyone who does not want a future Palestinian state "in theory" in Israel is considered as a far right winger.

They are far right wingers. They want a colony, and I'd consider colonizers to be reactionaries. Self-determination was a principle well established decades ago.