babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » you be the negotiator can you find a path to peace?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: you be the negotiator can you find a path to peace?
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 09 January 2005 10:19 AM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here is the idea for this thread. Put yourself in the role of the negotiators sitting around a table trying to draft a peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

As I see it there are two jobs to do. First find an agreement that the negotiators can agree on. Second will this agreement be able to be sold to the people for support.

Remember that a negotiation is not just saying that you are wrong and we want this. Rather a true negotiation is finding middle ground where both sides give up things they really want in order to compromise.

I do not think that a debate about current leadership would be helpful because very simply "bad" leaders have suprised and shocked me over the last 20 years or so by even attempting peace. Even bad leaders have listened to their advisors and entered into negotiations or found common ground to agree upon. In Israel both Likud and Labour have entered into peace talks or contributed to peace. So very simply saying "well Sharon will never agree to anything so go to hell" IMHO is not a valid answer.

Now the first issue is obvious the Israelis withdraw from the territories. I suggest that they withdraw from 99%. The remaining 1% will be nothing more than a buffer or border you could say.

Can Palestinians agree to this? I wonder how the negotiations would go. I wonder how much each side would really be willing to give up to ensure a lasting and stable peace treaty between two peoples.


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 09 January 2005 12:56 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You are approaching this from the wrong position as a mediator. You have already told one side what they can give up and asked the other side if that is acceptable without hearing from either side what they want?

How do you mediate a negotiation without the parties?

The first step would be to have the parties identify their competing demands. Eliminate the issues where there is little or no dispute and then set down to work on a compromise for the outstanding issues.

Good luck.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
johnpauljones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7554

posted 09 January 2005 01:04 PM      Profile for johnpauljones     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
You are approaching this from the wrong position as a mediator. You have already told one side what they can give up and asked the other side if that is acceptable without hearing from either side what they want?


Actually I never stated that I wanted a mediator role. Rather I hoped that we would put on our negotiations hats and try to see what might be offered or could be offered to get to peace.

After reading many threads on Israeli / Palestinian issues I have come to the opinion that we here do have positions and opinions on how peace should be reached.

I was just wondering if that would be something we could build on and try to do what others have not. That is find a path to peace.


From: City of Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 January 2005 01:14 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that we had the model decades ago, and there are some obvious reasons we haven't applied it in Israel/Palestine that are not about to go away. They all have to do with -- surprise! -- power.

If the UN really worked, we would have applied the Cyprus model to Israel/Palestine once the vicious cycle became clear. I know that it is, at first especially, an over-simple model, but it at least establishes peace long enough for a generation of relatively equal negotiators to emerge.

The problem in Israel/Palestine is the gross inequality of power -- Israel, backed up by the U.S., has it all, and can thus never negotiate in good faith.

In any other such confrontation, we would insist on a neutral third party or international team (1) imposing and enforcing peace; and (2) running negotiations.

But how can we have fair negotiations when one of the interested parties is running them?

I see no short-term solution to this dilemma. Two truths on the ground are undeniable: Palestinian society has probably been destroyed for a full further generation; and Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, however you cut the borders.

Rotten, eh?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 09 January 2005 03:11 PM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by johnpauljones:
Now the first issue is obvious the Israelis withdraw from the territories. I suggest that they withdraw from 99%. The remaining 1% will be nothing more than a buffer or border you could say.
I agree with you in princple. But, we must define what you mean by "Israelis." Do, you mean the IDF, or do you mean all Jews in the territories. If you are talking about the IDF, I have no objections to another withdrawl. But, I'm not sure 1% would be enough of a force to provide the security you refer to. If you are talking about the settlers, there is a lot of negotiating to be done about how many will be forcefully evacuated. And, I don't see why some couldn't be granted citizenship in a Palestinian state and be allowed to stay put.

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 09 January 2005 03:28 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, aside from the fact that in a Palestinian state their rights of access to land and water wouldn't trump those of other Palestinians, and they wouldn't be getting big subsidies to stay. So, all except the real zealots would probably bug out pretty quick. The zealots might stay out of sheer stubborn bloody-mindedness, and most likely end up in jail after initiating some violent incidents.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 January 2005 03:39 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Um, Phonicidal: you seem to be proposing that, even in an independent Palestinian state, a residual IDF occupying force would remain?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 09 January 2005 03:54 PM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Um, Phonicidal: you seem to be proposing that, even in an independent Palestinian state, a residual IDF occupying force would remain?
That's not what I am suggesting. I'm talking about steps towards full Palestinian independence. If you read carefully, you'll see that JPJ was referring to the 1% as "nothing more than a buffer or border." I agree in principle, I just think that the precise percentage should be left up to the parties involved.

You know, you don't always have to assume the worst.


From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 January 2005 03:58 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm not sure 1% would be enough of a force to provide the security you refer to.

You are referring to the IDF, right?

Perhaps jpj could clarify what he meant by the one per cent. I thought he meant territory, but perhaps I am wrong.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 09 January 2005 04:01 PM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Perhaps jpj could clarify what he meant by the one per cent. I thought he meant territory, but perhaps I am wrong.
Perhaps he was talking about territory. But, my point stands that the negotiations over details like how much of who evacuates and stays where, should be left up to those directly involved.

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 January 2005 12:21 AM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Palestinian society has probably been destroyed for a full further generation; and Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, however you cut the borders.

Why is that rotten? If Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, doesn't it mean that the Israeli government will soon be forced to improve Palestinian living conditions? if they don't do that, Israelis (both Jewish and Arab) run a serious risk of being expelled from the "holy land"
The way I look at it, the demographic problem could have some very positive side effects. It will make the well being of the palestinian people vital to isreal's survival.

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 10 January 2005 02:44 AM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
...the demographic problem...
Demographic problem? What demographic problem?
quote:
Report claims to debunk 'demographic bomb'
By Yair Ettinger, Haaretz Correspondent

...The document, which Haaretz has obtained, argues that 2.4 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today, and not the 3.8 million claimed by the Palestinian Authority.

In sharp contrast to population studies conducted in Israel by professors Arnon Sofer and Sergio della Pergola, the document argues that Jews continue to maintain a solid 60 percent majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.



From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 10 January 2005 06:26 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You missed a bit there.

quote:
An Israeli-American group whose members are clearly identified with the right authored the ABC Demographic Project. The group undercuts a prevailing assumption in Israel's public debate - that Jews have ceased, or will soon cease to be, a majority in that territory. The demographic danger is not "all it's made out to be," the writers state.

Della Pergola called the document "groundless," politically slanted and baseless from a research perspective. None of the signatories to the document is a professional in demographicresearch. Among its authors are former Israeli consul in Texas Yoram Ettinger (no relation to this reporter), former West Bank Civil Administration head Brigadier General (res.) David Shahaf and former Israeli health official Prof. Ezra Zohar.

The research was initiated and funded by Los Angeles Jewish businessman Ben Zimmerman and U.S.-based partners, historian Dr. Roberta Seid of the University of South Carolina and businessman Michael Wise.


quote:
But della Pergola rejects the new document entirely. He refers to a figure that has no basis in the Israeli population registry, a claim in the document that 300,000 Palestinians have become Israeli citizens since 1967, noting the lack of segmentation of the statistics according to age, "critical in any Israeli-Palestinian demographic study."

He added, "The authors seek to prove the political theory that the status quo is good for us and time is on our side. They are trying to attach some demographic claims to that thesis."

The demographer claims there are distorted figures in the document, in addition to a lack of familiarity with professional literature and accepted research methods." Sofer's response was unavailable.


I'm going to stick with the professionals on this one, if that's quite all right with you.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 10 January 2005 09:51 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm not sure that a Cyprus solution will work, skdadl. If Likud allows peace to break out again, Palestinians will want access to Israel to work. As in the recent past, Israelis will want access to Palestinian labour, too. Full separation of the populations won't really be possible, even in the short term, IMO. The border would become porous pretty quickly after the first peace is negotiated.

I think it's pretty clear what the best long term solution is to this war: One state with equal rights (including property rights) enshrined for Jews and non-Jews alike. The right of return for valid exiles. Extremely harsh penalties for racially based violence. A reconciliation tribunal for those whose lands and homes were stolen or destroyed.

The two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an idea, and a possibility, whose time has passed, its death obscured (as was perhaps intended) by daily spectacle: the hoopla of a useless 'road map', the cycles of Israeli gunship assassinations and Palestinian suicide bombings, the dismal internal Palestinian power struggles, the house demolitions and death counts - all the visible expressions of a conflict which has always been over control of land.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 January 2005 10:13 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Point taken about the labour exchange, Briguy, and also about what is desirable in the long term.

But I can't see the justice of pretending that negotiations are fair when one side is running the whole show, has all the power, and is occupying the other.

I don't expect the world to be competent enough right now to step in and mediate in truly neutral fashion. I'm just saying that that would be infinitely preferable.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 10 January 2005 11:56 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know where you're coming from, skdadl, figuratively speaking. Maybe a Cyprus solution would work there, at an accelerated pace? Rather than one or two generations of separation, it would only take 5-10 years for the denizens of the region to come to their senses? We might as well be optimistic in our dreams, no?
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 10 January 2005 12:16 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I too agree with Skdadl, though I hesitate to imagine less than 50 or 60 years to a point at which international peacekeepers could hope for reasonable negotiations from a generation grown up in a relatively peaceful environment.

It was the Brits & League of Nations who started this mess; it would be appropriate for the U.N. and Commonwealth peacekeepers to undertake mending it.


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 10 January 2005 12:54 PM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lard tunderin' jeesus:
It was the Brits & League of Nations who started this mess; it would be appropriate for the U.N. and Commonwealth peacekeepers to undertake mending it.
The Brits and the League of Nations (not to mention the UN) certainly did their part to fuck things up. But, it would be a mistake to think that they started a conflict which has literally been going on for thousands of years.

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 January 2005 12:56 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here we go.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 10 January 2005 12:58 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, we don't.

I'm certainly not taking that lousy bit of bait.


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 January 2005 12:59 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Neither am I.

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 January 2005 01:38 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The right of return for valid exiles.

Dude, they can't all come back. Granted, most of the land that was abandoned by the refugees during the Naqba stands empty, but Israel Isn't big enough to support every Palestinian exile from every refugee camp. some of them will have to accept compensation. Remember that the Isreali state will soon have to accommodate large numbers of Israeli Arabs as well.*

*Sorry if the above paragraph made me sound like a patronizing git. I'll try not to wag my finger at you in the future.

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 10 January 2005 02:01 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's hard to argue that there's no room for the Palestinian exiles when the country continually calls for Jews worldwide to emigrate. That said, I hardly imagine that a large number of exiles want to return, anyway. I'm sure many of them have new lives and homes abroad (those who've been lucky enough to escape the squalor of the refugee camps in Palestine).
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 January 2005 02:26 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's hard to argue that there's no room for the Palestinian exiles when the country continually calls for Jews worldwide to emigrate.

I didn't say there was no room for Palestinian refugees. I said that the Israel couldn't accept the entire refugee population. I do believe however, that there is room for a substantial number of exiles.
How many palestinians currently live in the camps?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 10 January 2005 03:09 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In Gaza and the West Bank, there are about 1.5 million, according to this site. As well, there are about 200,000 internally displaced within Israel proper. In any other conflict, I suppose that the Gaza and West Bank populations would be considered 'internally displaced' as well.*

Worldwide, the claim is 5,000,000. Given the length of time since 1948, and the natural tendancy of people to grow new roots, I really doubt that 5,000,000 is an accurate representation of the number who would like to return.

*If one were to treat the destruction of Palestine and the emergence of Israel as a civil war between two populations of the same state, that is.

This site claims 4,000,000.

quote:
I didn't say there was no room for Palestinian refugees. I said that the Israel couldn't accept the entire refugee population.

I don't understand the difference, being a pesky secularist. (I'm kinda yanking your chain. I understand what you mean, but I'm not really accepting of the whole religionist/demographic basis for a state structure.)

Geez louise, it would've been so much easier to take care of this problem in 1948 when the number of refugees was only 750,000. And when I say 'take care of', I don't mean it in the typical National Post sense.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 January 2005 08:32 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Step 1) Sharon is removed from any official position within the Israeli government. As it is there is no Israeli partner for peace, as Abbas will soon find out.

What is most remarkable about the whole Abbas election is that he has not said even one thing that distinguishes him from Arafat. His stated public position is carbon copy of the Fatah position under Arafat. The fact that people have not noticed this is most remarkable.

Most stunning that this has not been noticed at all be the media, who seem hell bent of presenting Abbas as a big change from Arafat. Admitting that the Fatah position is more or less a political fait accompli forced by the political circumstance under which the Palestinian voice must be expressed -- there is simply no way that the Palestinian position can be any softer because there is no room to manouver. This may be hard to accept, (and therefore recognize) for some people in the media because they simply can not bring themselves to see that it is almost solely Israeli intransigence under Sharon, not Palestinian 'terrorism' which has led to the present blockage of the peace process.

The recieved wisom is that the problem was Arafat, and with his demise things will change. But we must ask, why, if it is Arafat that was the problem, is Abbas's stated position no different than Arafat's?

He has dedicated the election to Arafat, quite rightly so, for he is a direct heir to Arafat's legacy.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 10 January 2005 09:03 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In Gaza and the West Bank, there are about 1.5 million, according to this site. As well, there are about 200,000 internally displaced within Israel proper.

They don't have Isreali citizenship?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 11 January 2005 10:54 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I presume that they have Israeli citizenship, but lost their family/ancestral homes during the 1948 offensive. But really, I don't know what the site means by 'internally displaced' within Israel. I'm just surfing here.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 11 January 2005 12:28 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Briguy:
I presume that they have Israeli citizenship, but lost their family/ancestral homes during the 1948 offensive. But really, I don't know what the site means by 'internally displaced' within Israel. I'm just surfing here.

There are supposidly 1.3 million Israeli arabs in Isreal proper. I think your numbers are wrong.


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Phonicidal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7635

posted 11 January 2005 12:45 PM      Profile for Phonicidal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
There are supposidly 1.3 million Israeli arabs in Isreal proper. I think your numbers are wrong.
You can always check the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics to check their numbers.

From: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 11 January 2005 01:37 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In the 1948 war tht resulted in the creation of the state of Isral in 77% of Palestine, some 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and dispossessed of their homes and land. Approximately 100,000 Palestinians remained in the territory that became the state of Israel and subsequently were nationalized as Israeli citizens. Some 40,000 of these Palestinians were internally displaced from their land and homes and most were prevented from returning even though they became Israeli citizens.

This is from my first link. As I said, not my numbers (nor my claim), I'm just trying to find information like most others here.

Edited to add: Even if we leave the 200,000 number from that first post out of consideration, it doesn't change the tenor of the refugee problem nor the scale of the refugee population (by much). We don't need to harp on that one point in our little peace discussion thread.

[ 11 January 2005: Message edited by: Briguy ]


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca