If Palestinians and Israelis were to get a peace process started again, they must—so as not to repeat the mistakes of the Oslo Accords and the Taba talks—ask themselves where that process will end. For an agreement to work, both sides must have a clear understanding of what the end result will be. Another necessary component for moving forward is the need to link Israel’s security concerns with Palestinian concerns for freedom. These formulas for “how to move forward” after the Israeli military incursion in the West Bank, which destroyed the Palestinian civil and security infrastructure, were presented at a 1 May Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine (Palestine Center) briefing by Diana Buttu and Michael Tarazi, legal advisors from the Negotiations Support Unit of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s (PLO) Negotiations Affairs Department.

According to Tarazi, there is now much discussion among Palestinians that favors a return to negotiations from the point where they ended in 2001 at the Egyptian seaside resort of Taba. However, in Taba, as in previous negotiations, the end result was never clear. In Tarazi’s opinion, both sides had a very different view of what the end result would be.

“This is a problem we have to get over this time,” Tarazi said. Citing some faults in the Taba talks, Tarazi pointed out the under Taba, Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem would become “ghettos” and Israel, through its settlements around East Jerusalem, would have almost complete control over that sector of the city. On the issue of land swaps, Tarazi said Taba never designated which land the Palestinians would get from Israel, but Israel knew which land it was getting from the Palestinians.

In the meantime, Tarazi suggests that Palestinians and Israelis begin addressing the two issues that each side fears the most. Tarazi calls them the “existential threats” facing both sides. Speaking as an “individual,” and not as an official of the NSU, Tarazi proposed that negotiators begin tackling the issues of Palestinian refugees and Israeli settlements.

According to Tarazi, the most frightening issue for Israelis is the return of millions of Palestinian refugees to homes they were forced to flee when Israel was created in 1948. Tarazi believes most Israelis are prepared to compromise on any of the issues outlined in a final peace settlement, except the issue of refugees.

“This hits home to them,” Tarazi explained. Israelis, he said, cannot accept Palestinian Muslims and Christians “flooding” Israel because that would destroy the Jewish nature of their state. To ease their fears, Tarazi said the Palestinians could introduce a series of options to Palestinian refugees, one of which is the chance to return to Israel.

The refugees would be given the “power” to decide their future through a series of options such as normalization in their host country, moving to a third country like Canada or the United States, coming to a Palestinian state, or returning to Israel. However, Tarazi stressed, the Palestinians would consider presenting the refugees with these options if Israel would put in place a series of incentives to get Jewish settlers to move to Israel. “For the Palestinians, the existential threat is the colonies,” Tarazi said.

Tarazi argued that as long as settlements continue to be built, no Palestinian would be convinced that the conflict would end. He added that most Jews living in the settlements do so for economic reasons and not because of ideological beliefs.

Buttu addressed the importance of linking Israel’s security concerns with Palestinian concerns for freedom when searching for a way out of the current crisis. She blamed the U.S. administration for allowing the crisis to develop because it focused only on Israel’s security concerns while ignoring Palestinian concerns.

“The U.S. administration’s unwillingness to focus on Palestinian freedom has primarily led us into the situation we find ourselves in today,” Buttu said. Buttu was referring to the 19-month long Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation and the devastating Israeli military response to it.

On 29 March, the Israeli army re-occupied Palestinian-controlled territory in what Israel said was a military operation designed to destroy the “terrorist” infrastructure in the West Bank. But Buttu argued that what Israel destroyed was the Palestinian civil and security infrastructure, creating a dire humanitarian crisis.

During a tour of Palestinian ministries in the West Bank town of Ramallah, Buttu said she saw “significant damage” to the ministries of education, economy and trade, and agriculture. Lost forever, Buttu said, were education files and student transcripts, land records, and basic governing records like transportation registrations. The security infrastructure has been completely decimated, and police stations and even policemen are gone.

The Palestinian infrastructure must be rebuilt. In doing so, and taking into account the humanitarian aid, the rebuilding process must be tied to a two-level “broader political picture.” A political solution, Buttu said, must include a final peace settlement that addresses the needs of both sides. The deployment of an international intervention force to help rebuild the infrastructure and protect Palestinians from further Israeli incursions is a necessary part of a political solution.

Since the start of the uprising, Palestinians have stressed the necessity of an international presence in the territories to monitor Israel’s compliance, or lack thereof, with the Fourth Geneva Convention. Now, says Buttu, an international force is crucial.

“There are rules of the game, there are laws that govern the way an occupying power operates in the Occupied Territories and these laws have been systematically violated over the past 35 years, and more so in the past four weeks,” Buttu said.

The above text is based on remarks delivered on 1 May 2002 by Diana Buttu and Michael Tarazi. The speakers’ views do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine or The Jerusalem Fund. This “For the Record” may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine. To contact Buttu, write to dbuttu@nsu-pal.org. To contact Tarazi, write to amtarazi@nsu-pal.org.

This information first appeared in “For the Record” No. 110, 2 May 2002.