From Fox Five News today.  See the film clip.

via Clinton Opens New Round of Mideast Peace Talks

WASHINGTON – Marc Gopin from the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University joined us with more.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton formally opened the first direct peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians in nearly two years on Thursday, imploring the parties to ignore the long history of failed negotiations and make needed compromises to forge an agreement.

At a ceremony in the State Department’s ornate Benjamin Franklin room, Clinton said the Obama administration was committed to forging a settlement in a year’s time. But, she stressed that the heavy lifting must be done by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

“We will be an active and sustained partner,” she said. “But we cannot and we will not impose a solution. Only you can make the decisions necessary to reach an agreement and secure a peaceful future for the Israeli and Palestinian people.”

Netanyahu and Abbas pledged their seriousness to securing an agreement and overcoming decades of mutual hostility and suspicion.

“This will not be easy,” Netanyahu said. “True peace, a lasting peace, will be achieved only with mutual and painful concessions from both sides.”

“We do know how hard are the hurdles and obstacles we face during these negotiations — negotiations that within a year should result in an agreement that will bring peace,” Abbas said.

Abbas called on Israel to end Jewish settlements in the West Bank and other areas that the Palestinians want to be part off their own state. Netanyahu insisted that any agreement must assure Israel’s security.

Thursday’s negotiations are the first since the last effort broke down in December 2008 and are fraught with complications, including recent violence in the West Bank and Israeli settlement activity. Expectations are low and U.S. officials have said success may be only an agreement to hold a second round of negotiations.

Officials say they are hoping to arrange that meeting for Sept. 15 in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheik and top aides to the leaders are expected to meet later Thursday to iron out final details of the next step.

Sitting at the top of a U-shaped table between Netanyahu and Abbas, Clinton congratulated the two for agreeing to resume negotiations but warned of difficult days to come in the effort to create an independent Palestinian state.

“I know the decision to sit at this table was not easy,” Clinton added. “We understand the suspicion and skepticism that so many feel borne out of years of conflict and frustrated hopes.”

She noted two recent attacks on Israelis in the West Bank claimed by the militant Hamas movement underscored the difficulties facing the two leaders.

“But, by being here today, you each have taken an important set toward freeing your peoples from the shackles of a history we cannot change and moving toward a future of peace and dignity that only you can create.”

Hamas gunmen killed four Israeli residents of a West Bank settlement on Tuesday as Netanyahu, Abbas and the leaders of Egypt and Jordan convened in Washington. And on Wednesday, hours before the leaders ate dinner at the White House, Hamas gunmen wounded two Israelis as they drove in their car in another part of the West Bank.

The talks will face their first test within weeks, at the end of September, when the Israeli government’s declared slowdown in settlement construction is slated to end.

Palestinians have said that a renewal of settlement construction will torpedo the talks. The Israeli government is divided over the future of the slowdown, and a decision to extend it could split Netanyahu’s hawkish coalition. Netanyahu has given no indication so far that it will continue beyond the deadline.

Direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations broke off nearly two years ago, in December 2008, and the Obama administration spent its first 20 months in office coaxing the two sides back to the bargaining table. Despite the success in launching the talks, gaps between the sides are wide, distrust remains after years of violence and deadlock, and expectations are low.

After listening to the Mideast leaders he convened Wednesday night, Obama pronounced himself carefully optimistic. “I am hopeful, cautiously hopeful, but hopeful,” he said.

Folks, I published this with Common Ground News Service. Here is a version of it from the Bali Times.

A Practical Path to Justice and an Independent PalestineAugust 16, 2010

By Rabbi Marc Gopin

The creation of an independent Palestine has been a dream dashed many times, but there may be a practical path forward emerging from a surprising place. I often heard the phrase “business is business” growing up in the 1960s among gritty American Jewish immigrants; my father said it all the time. It reflected old Jewish instincts to do whatever it takes to survive and feed “the family,” even when it meant dealing with people who disliked you – a lot.

What floored me is when my Palestinian partner, Aziz Abu Sarah, with whom I recently founded MEJDI, a social enterprise (business designed for a social goal), told me exactly the same words from his father! Aziz’s family and mine are not involved in our new business venture, but every innovation has implications for the political situation in Palestine, and we seek advice and reactions. I have been shocked by the positive reception in my right wing family to the idea of honest business as a bridge. And every time I asked Aziz, “Are you sure your family is ok with Jews and Arabs doing business given their terrible troubles? They know how Jewish I am?” The answer came, “Business is business.”

I feel very much at home with people who love their families, who see the virtue of work, who when facing an unjust situation recognise that practical and ethical people sometimes prevail. Sometimes honest work eases the way to a sane political vision that overwhelms self-destructive patterns of enemy systems and wounded peoples.

There is a lot of good news on the business front. There is a Palestinian prime minister, increasingly popular, who is revolutionising the infrastructure of Palestine, preparing for prosperity and statehood. Saudi Arabia, the most conservative state in the region, has just announced a US$400-million project for Ramallah. Many Western countries are pouring in huge funds for the private sector.

Will these investments benefit most Palestinians? We are all haunted by “the last time,” by the Oslo years of large funds – and large corruption. But thankfully a recent economic conference in Palestine, which included an American presidential delegation headed by Senator George Mitchell, slated $950 million for small- and medium-sized businesses.

My partners and I at MEJDI want more, however. We argue that more is needed to place justice at the centre of Palestine’s future, and to discourage an investor tendency to make a few wealthy and most miserable. All the incoming funds are good but we should explicitly support socially responsible business in Palestine.

Although there is no ultimate solution for Palestine without an end to the Occupation, small businesses are needed to form the backbone of a viable state. Small businesses generate a middle class that depends on the rule of law and democratic values, whereas countries supported only through large corporations and government control rarely emerge as democracies. Palestinians deserve a democracy at the end of their long struggle.

Here is an example of what we are doing as a social enterprise. We are pioneering both tours and academic seminars where almost every dollar spent is going to support and patronize businesses with a clear reputation for fair wages. Profits are also re-invested in lecturers and tour guides who are well known activists for positive social change.

This is just one example of the intersection of small business empowerment and social change. Our other major innovation is the distribution in the West of products made by poor but innovative Palestinian small businesses paying only fair wages. I have learned after 27 years of peace activism that ignoring inequality and poverty is disastrous and it violates every tenet of the region’s religious traditions and values. The un-sustainability of the average Palestinian family makes old ways of coexistence work inadequate. Serious attention to fair wages, however, and financial support for Palestine’s social change activists help engender support for Palestine’s nascent non-violent struggle.

Generations, even centuries, of Muslims and Jews, built mutually prosperous and equal relationships; we are merely recovering their legacy. There have been many times of misery in the long history of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim relationship, but there were also many good times, golden ages. Honest business based on good wages and equal relationships may be one glue that has bonded Middle Eastern cultures before, and may help make inevitable the political path forward towards a just and equal two-state solution.

Rabbi Dr. Marc Gopin, author of To Make the Earth Whole, is a principal of MEJDI LLC (www.mejdi.net).

via A Practical Path to Justice and an Independent Palestine.

Below is a translation from the Arabic article published by Alquds Newspaper on Tuesday 17th of August 2010 Click here for the Arabic

By:Aziz Abu Sarah

A year ago, the Palestinians encountered unprecedented change in the U.S. and international community toward the Palestinian issue, as the international community noticeably increased pressure on the Israeli government to freeze settlements and accept the principle of a two-state solution for final settlement. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was able to evade the pressure by throwing the ball into the Palestinian court, demanding that the Palestinians return to direct negotiations.

The Palestinian side rejected the demand for direct negotiations, citing a lack of progress in indirect negotiations and the absence of any trust building with the Israeli side. This decision led the international community to exercise pressure on the Palestinians, and interpret their decision as a lack of interest in negotiations. Netanyahu took this opportunity to present himself as a peace seeker and renew his allegations that there is no partner for peace on the Palestinian side.

The Palestinians’ fear of direct negotiations with Netanyahu comes from painful memories and experiences that Palestinian negotiators have repeatedly gone through. Such negotiations normally began with never ending talks, and ended with the Palestinians being blamed after every round of unsuccessful negotiations.

The Palestinians also have not forgotten the results of direct negotiations with Netanyahu in his first premiership in the nineties.

However, the international community has gone through many changes and is different today, and therefore we must be aware of how these changes may affect Palestinian-Israeli negotiations.

There are voices in the Palestinian community which insist that engaging in direct talks would weaken the Palestinian position, and therefore we should reject the demand for negotiations. However, the opposite is true. Nothing weakens the Palestinians more than appearing to oppose negotiations, leaving them open to be labeled obstructionists of the peace process.

On the other hand, entering into direct negotiations with the Israelis could strengthen the Palestinian position. Last year Palestinians succeeded in winning the confidence and trust of the international community by demonstrating their ability to build infrastructure and institutions for the future Palestinian state. The Palestinians have also been able to foster strong international support for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the near future by highlighting the deteriorating conditions on the ground that could lead to the death of the unborn Palestinian state.

Moreover, the current U.S. administration is more sympathetic to Palestinian suffering and more attentive to their hopes than any other U.S. administration in the past.  President Obama announced that he would like to see a Palestinian state before the end of his term, which expires in two and a half years. He demonstrated his commitment by choosing George Mitchell to serve as the U.S. envoy to the Middle East, a former U.S. senator known for fairness and directness in facilitating negotiations and for his experience in dealing with complicated negotiations, such as those in Northern Ireland.

Perhaps one of the most important changes in the current U.S. administration is their willingness to confront the Israeli government publicly. Several times over the past year, the administration has challenged Israel on the construction of settlements, which the former U.S. administration avoided.

For the first time ever, the Palestinians have a possible advantage over their Israeli counterparts in negotiations. While the current Israeli government has been unable to provide any serious offers for a final settlement, it seems that the Palestinians are ready to offer a comprehensive settlement for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

As result, the Palestinians must initiate by presenting their offer, rather than waiting for an Israeli offer. This will throw the ball back in the Israeli court and put Netanyahu in a position to reveal whether he is serious about reaching an agreement. Also, engaging in direct negotiations before the end of the partial settlement freeze may give Palestinians leverage to pressure Israel to continue the freeze. Rejecting the direct negations, however, would give Netanyahu an excuse to resume building settlements.

That said, the return to direct negotiations must avoid past mistakes. It is important that negotiations be tied to a clear framework and timetable. The passage of time without any progress in the peace process will only kill a two state solution. We can take Netanyahu’s recent statement about the possibility of achieving a peace agreement within one year as a timetable for the declaration of a Palestinian state.

The Palestinian decision to return to direct negotiations with Israeli should not happen as a result of international pressure. Instead, the Palestinian side should make a diplomatic and strategic decision to enter direct negotiations, with the knowledge that it is in the best interest of the Palestinian people.

In Jerusalem’s Mamilla cemetery, Rawan Dajani stands before a mausoleum where her ancestor Sheikh Ahmed Dajani was buried nearly 450 years ago.

By Omar Kasrawi

Standing outside a mausoleum in Jerusalem’s Mamilla cemetery, Rawan Dajani bows her head and cups her hands upward in prayer for her ancestor Sheikh Ahmed Dajani. He was buried in Mamilla, the oldest Muslim burial ground in Jerusalem, nearly half a millennium ago.

About 200 meters away, a fenced-off construction zone marks the future site of the Center for Human Dignity – Museum of Tolerance, a project overseen by the California-based Simon Wiesenthal Center.

In Israel, starting a new project inevitably means bumping into history. In this case, the construction that started in 2004 has stirred Muslim anger as it displaces hundreds of Muslim graves dating as far back as the 7th century, including the remains of soldiers and officials of the Muslim ruler Saladin.

IN PICTURES: Israeli settlements

Wiesenthal officials say they have followed every recommendation of the Israel Antiquities Authority, which is in charge of “salvage excavations,” and point out that Muslim authorities in the 1920s had approved building on the plot.

The Mamilla controversy is not unique in Israel, where it’s common for different religions’ sacred spaces to overlap. Two of the holiest sites in Islam – Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock – sit atop the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism, where the Torah proclaims the Holy Temple will be rebuilt.

But these controversies are more than debates over landownership; they are debates over the ownership of memories, a place in human history.

In Israel especially, place is connected to identity, making it a priority to protect the places that offer a sense of belonging. Any effort to remove evidence of historical ties is seen as an attack on identity. Just last week, Israeli authorities destroyed at least 15 tombstones in the Mamilla cemetery which it said were illegally built.

“There is a tendency in both communities to deny the spirituality or the sanctity or the history of the other on a certain spot,” says Marc Gopin, a rabbi and the director of George Mason University’s Center for World Religions, Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution.

Why place plays such a key role in identity

Such tactics are common. This past March, a right-wing Israeli group sponsored ads on 200 buses that displayed fictitious posters of the Temple Mount, in which a Third Temple replaced the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

In 2000 Israeli leader Ariel Sharon set off the second intifada by visiting the Temple Mount and asserting permanent Israeli sovereignty over the compound. The violence lasted four years and claimed the lives of more than 5,000 Palestinians and 1,000 Israelis.

But even lesser-known holy sites become part of the conflict if a community feels its presence being threatened.

Recently, the Israeli government named as heritage sites Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem and the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, which both Judaism and Islam claim as Abraham’s birthplace. By claiming sites in the Palestinian-controlled West Bank, Israel further blurred the lines of the ownership of land – and history.

How Muslims are protesting Mamilla project

In the case of the Wiesenthal project, protesters claim the museum’s construction is an effort to conquer what Muslims consider religious territory. It has provoked petitions from Palestinian descendants of the buried, including Ms. Dajani.

“I feel like I have lots of energy to do something” about the construction, says Dajani, whose family’s name is prominent among Palestinians. “But at the end I understand that this is very difficult. The Israelis will not let us do anything easily.”

With construction set to continue, activists are focused on a still untouched part of the cemetery. According to Diyala Husseini Dajani, a protester with family ties to Mamilla – but no relation to Rawan – nearly $18,000 was raised to support a memorial wall that will display the names of everyone buried in the cemetery.

Mr. Gopin says such gestures are effective peacekeeping tactics.

“The only thing that is left to be done at this point is to make gestures of apology, offer to build up what’s left of the cemetery with security and with the refurbishing of all the stones,” says Gopin. “But you can’t just make nice gestures. It has to come with a real proof that you believe in a peaceful coexistence.”

Israel archaeologist: It’s totally politics

Gideon Sulimani, chief archaeologist appointed by the Israel Antiquities Authority to excavate the museum site, doubts there is a genuine desire for coexistence in this case. Mr. Sulimani discovered more than 200 bodies during the dig in 2005.

Despite his recommendation that the site not be released for construction, the antiquities authorities informed the Supreme Court to clear the area for construction.

“It’s part of the conflict about who owns the land,” Sulimani said. “It’s not archaeology. It’s not science. They want to move away the Muslim memory of the area to make it Jewish. So it’s totally politics.”

Some Palestinians involved are hopeful that even if the new museum rises, their protest efforts will bring some acknowledgment to the Muslim burial ground that once stood on the site.

“It’s not that I’m concerned about the graves as much as I’m concerned about the fact that we don’t exist to the Israelis,” Ms. Husseini Dajani said.

From the Christian-Science Monitor, original post http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0811/Why-Israeli-Palestinian-conflicts-over-land-turn-epic

The creation of an independent Palestine has been a dream dashed many times, but there may be a practical path forward emerging from a surprising place. I often heard the phrase ‘business is business’ growing up in the 1960s among gritty American Jewish immigrants; my father said it all the time. It reflected old Jewish instincts to do whatever it takes to survive and feed ‘the family’, even when it meant dealing with people who disliked you – a lot.

What floored me is when my Palestinian partner, Aziz Abu Sarah, with whom I recently founded MEJDI, a social enterprise (business designed for a social goal), told me exactly the same words from his father! Aziz’s family and mine are not involved in our new business venture, but every innovation has implications for the political situation in Palestine, and we seek advice and reactions. I have been shocked by the positive reception in my right wing family to the idea of honest business as a bridge. And every time I asked Aziz, “Are you sure your family is ok with Jews and Arabs doing business given their terrible troubles? They know how Jewish I am?” The answer came, “Business is business.”

I feel very much at home with people who love their families, who see the virtue of work, who when facing an unjust situation recognise that practical and ethical people sometimes prevail. Sometimes honest work eases the way to a sane political vision that overwhelms self-destructive patterns of enemy systems and wounded peoples.

There is a lot of good news on the business front. There is a Palestinian prime minister, increasingly popular, who is revolutionising the infrastructure of Palestine, preparing for prosperity and statehood. Saudi Arabia, the most conservative state in the region, has just announced a 400 million dollar project for Ramallah. Many Western countries are pouring in huge funds for the private sector.

Will these investments benefit most Palestinians? We are all haunted by ‘the last time’, by the Oslo years of large funds – and large corruption. But thankfully a recent economic conference in Palestine, which included an American presidential delegation headed by Senator George Mitchell, slated $950 million for small and medium sized businesses.

My partners and I at MEJDI want more, however. We argue that more is needed to place justice at the centre of Palestine’s future, and to discourage an investor tendency to make a few wealthy and most miserable. All the incoming funds are good but we should explicitly support socially responsible business in Palestine.

Although there is no ultimate solution for Palestine without an end to the Occupation, small businesses are needed to form the backbone of a viable state. Small businesses generate a middle class that depends on the rule of law and democratic values, whereas countries supported only through large corporations and government control rarely emerge as democracies. Palestinians deserve a democracy at the end of their long struggle.

Here is an example of what we are doing as a social enterprise. We are pioneering both tours and academic seminars where almost every dollar spent is going to support and patronize businesses with a clear reputation for fair wages. Profits are also re-invested in lecturers and tour guides who are well known activists for positive social change.

This is just one example of the intersection of small business empowerment and social change. Our other major innovation is the distribution in the West of products made by poor but innovative Palestinian small businesses paying only fair wages. I have learned after 27 years of peace activism that ignoring inequality and poverty is disastrous and it violates every tenet of the region’s religious traditions and values. The un-sustainability of the average Palestinian family makes old ways of coexistence work inadequate. Serious attention to fair wages, however, and financial support for Palestine’s social change activists help engender support for Palestine’s nascent non-violent struggle.

Generations, even centuries, of Muslims and Jews, built mutually prosperous and equal relationships; we are merely recovering their legacy. There have been many times of misery in the long history of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim relationship, but there were also many good times, golden ages. Honest business based on good wages and equal relationships may be one glue that has bonded Middle Eastern cultures before, and may help make inevitable the political path forward toward a just and equal two-state solution.
Published in Common Ground News Service, http://www.commongroundnews.org/article.php?id=28228&lan=en&sid=0&sp=0&isNew=1

Chaim Pearlman in court Wednesday.

via ‘Not enough evidence to convict suspected Jewish terrorist Pearlman’ – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Helping Jews move beyond the Holocaust to the Rule of Law

You see this face? This is the face of an angel. I see the face of an angel. This is what I spent most of my life thinking of and dreaming of as the face of an angel. His name means ‘life’ and I grew up feeling that he was preserving the ‘life’ the soul of our people. That is what we were doing in Kollel, the learning halls of perpetual study. I grew up worshiping the Ben Toah, the student of Torah, a young person of study, humility, gentleness, that has  been a prototype of ideal Jewish life going back thousands of years. He has early ancestors in generations of youth going  back to the great cities of Babylon, let alone all the major cities of Europe, West and East. He is embedded in my ideal self. I see him and I see calm, insight, thoughtfulness, intelligence, I see the character of Danny in the Potok’s The Chosen, and Motel the Tailor, of Fiddler on the Roof, all wrapped into one, gentle, learned, thoughtful, sensitive.

So how does this face of an angel become a racist and a murderer? Easy, bad teachers, bad philosophies. You can’t tell me he has had a harder life than 2000 years of pious young men in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. But for me losing him, turning against him, insisting that there actually be the rule of law in Israel so a man like this can stay behind bars the rest of his life, be deprived of life, the way that he deprived so many others, this is hard for me emotionally–and for millions of Jews who refuse to enforce the rule of law in Israel and Palestine. So I ask my readers to understand that the death of Potok’s Danny and Sholom Aleichem’s Motel is a hard death for us. The Nazis killed their bodies but this man has killed the soul of that Jewish archetype. We need to evolve a new set of archetypes of piety and decency, and it is not easy to face this.

This is an important piece on what  pragmatically can and should be supported right now to prepare for and achieve Palestinian independence.

WASHINGTON, DC – Almost everything about the second Palestine Investment Conference held in Bethlehem in early June, which I had the honour of attending as a member of President Barack Obama’s official delegation, was encouraging.

The Conference, which was designed to promote private sector development, was held at the elegant and modern Convention Center facility in Bethlehem from 2-3 June. President Mahmoud Abbas welcomed around 2,000 participants including Palestinian and Arab business people from around the world, impressive entrepreneurs from Gaza, and many international institutional representatives and investors. The message, summed up by the Quartet Envoy Tony Blair was simple: Palestine is open for business!

While the first Investment Conference in 2008 focused on large development and public-private partnership initiatives, this Conference focused properly on small to medium-sized businesses, which account for about 90% of Palestinian businesses.

Over $950 million was slated for a variety of projects that should have a significant impact in developing the Palestinian economy and society. Panel discussions, business-to-business interactions and corporate displays filled the two days of meetings.

The Conference itself is becoming an institution and work is already underway for a third investment conference in May 2011, this time focusing on health and education.

I was deeply struck by the extent to which security is now taken for granted in the areas under Palestinian Authority control such as Bethlehem. This is an extraordinary transformation from recent years in which lawlessness often prevailed and when constricting Israeli controls would have rendered such an event both unthinkable and practically impossible.

Israel, though clearly present at the Bethlehem checkpoint, was cooperative. It allowed around 100 Gaza business persons to attend the conference and facilitated the participation of Arab financiers and entrepreneurs from states that do not have diplomatic relations with Israel.

I was impressed and proud, after our delegation met with US Consulate officials, of the extent of our government’s involvement in the conference and its workings, far beyond our Presidential delegation. The United States has clearly committed major effort and resources to the programme of state and institution building undertaken by the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Supporting the PIC was an important and visible expression of the administration’s commitment. Our six-member Presidential Delegation of very senior-level officials and private individuals was led by Special Envoy George Mitchell, which underlined the seriousness with which our government takes both negotiations and the state building process. Read more here.

[9] Ori Nir, “APN Weighs in on BDS, Criticism of Israel,” PeaceNow.org, 23 April 2010 (accessed 1 May 2010).

Professional Development Seminar in Citizen Diplomacy

with Rabbi Dr. Marc Gopin and Palestinian peacebuilder Aziz Abu Sarah

Based in Jerusalem with day trips to neighboring cities and Holy sites

• Contact: Scott Cooper or Becca Grimm at ‘crdc@gmu.edu‘ or 1-703-993-4473 (USA)

This seminar will be a combination of theory exploration, training, and concrete practice in the field. Based on Dr. Gopin’s most recent theories in To Make the Earth Whole: The Art of Citizen Diplomacy, the course will create space for participants to understand and measure in a new way the dynamics of their own potential impact on war and peace. It explores:

1. The theory and practice of positive incremental change and citizen diplomacy
2. A central case study from the Middle East
3. The philosophical and spiritual ethics, East and West, of decision making in conflict interventions.

Along with the study of theory, role plays and simulations, the course will involve direct engagement with Israeli and Palestinian nonprofit and for profit change makers, both secular and religious. There will be on the ground engagement in both Israel and Palestine, while inside the classroom and on tour.

Dr. Gopin will be joined by the CRDC’s Director of Middle East Projects Aziz Abu Sarah.  Mr. Abu Sarah will co-lead many of the trainings and manage the tour component of the course.  Mr. Abu Sarah brings over 10 years of experience in Palestinian-Israeli peacebuilding and Middle East tourism.  Most notably, he was the Palestinian Chairman of the Parent’s Circle – Families Forum, a joint organization of 500 Israeli and Palestinian bereaved families who work for reconciliation within and between their societies.  He also worked with organizations such as All For Peace Radio and Al-Tariq: The Palestinian Institute for Democracy and Development (which he co-founded).

The seminar will be based most days in Jerusalem, with CLASS TIME, TRAINING, AND EXCURSIONS planned on alternate days.

Considering the sensitive nature of the practice component of this work, students will be asked to submit a CV as well as a statement of their qualifications and goals in order to apply for this seminar.

Includes:

• Approximately 25 hours of class time
• Meetings with several Palestinian and Israeli peacebuilding organizations, officials, relgious leaders and business people
  • Organization include: Parents Circle – Bereaved Families Forum
• Hotel
• 2 meals per day
• Transportation
• Tour guide
• Visits to Bethlehem, Ramallah, Jerusalem and Hebron
• Can be taken for credit through George Mason University in Arlington, VA**

Price:

• $2780.00 (airfare not included)
  • Subsidies available for local Palestinians and Israelis to participate – please contact CRDC for more details

Dates:

• May 27 – June 4th 2010

Location:

• Jerusalem

Course Description:

• http://crdcgmu.wordpress.com/education/

Syllabus:

• http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddjpxvx7_20djtkntcr

**3 credits graduate or undregraduate – price $3180.00 instead of $2780.00

“Proximity talks”: an element in a change strategy.
By Neri Bar-On

In this article I wish to point out a systemic-perspective suggesting the “proximity talks” as a tactical move through which Israeli, Palestinian and American leadership can work within one strategy to reduce the power of the radical elements in their society. While many question the content-value of the “Proximity talks,” many neglect the power structure it creates as an opportunity to put pressure on the radical elements within these societies and open the gate to agreement between Israel and Palestine.
The concern should be the drift of the moderate elements in these societies toward radical reaction that will block opportunity for change. The inner conflicts within Israel and Palestine are blocking the progress and need to be contained for the establishment of a Palestinian state in near future.

“Proximity talks”:
“Proximity talks” are neither negotiations nor “talks”. In the current situation, “Proximity talks” can be a useful element in a change strategy. They can be used by Palestinians and Israelis as a method to defuse the radicals’ influence within each of their societies. “Proximity talks” are a signal of commitment to end this conflict beyond negotiation rituals: Natanyahu, Abbas and Obama can open a gate for change by maintaining these “proximity talks,” regardless of the reactive violence that erupted lately, as this violence actually shows what a great potential hides behind this gesture.

What we see:
Since Netanyahu’s return from the US, the tension between Israel and the US is more visible. The visit also exposed the internal tensions within Israel, where Pro-settlement agents in the Israeli governance organizations and government manage to sabotage the opportunity to start the “Proximity talks”; the announcement of new Jewish building in east Jerusalem provided justification for Palestinian radicalization calling for “rage day”. Qassams from Gaza strengthen the Israeli radicalization fear that this will be repeated when a Palestinian state will be established and Israeli armed reactions prove to the Palestinians how violent occupation is.
There is a natural collaboration between Israelis and Palestinian radicals. These reactions already claimed death in an effort to block change that may close the options for the radical’s view of the future.

Radicals:
Radicals usually advocate that their ideas of the future and of reality are the only valid ones and act to make them politically dominant. The Settlers will push announcements of building in disputed east Jerusalem in the Obama administration’s face, forcing the internal Israeli politicians to claim again that building in Jerusalem is unquestionable. In parallel, Palestinian radical factions flame aggression and fire Qassams into Israel that lead automatically to Israeli armed reaction that force the Palestinian leaders to avoid any talks.

Naturally, we have radical elements in any society; “radical factions” are normal social elements strengthening through the continuation of conflict. These people clearly become dominant actors and manage to block progress in the development of the relationship between Jews and Arabs. Their target is to be recognized as the “voice of the whole” in each society and they are pointed to as the “voice of the whole” by the other side’s radicals.
The radicals may succeed as they succeeded in the past unless we replace “negotiation” that pushes each side to the extreme with “proximity talks” that force Israel to halt the settlements and push the Palestinians to end their political divide.

Many focus on blame of Netanyahu, Ishay, Obama or Abbas for a hidden agenda to jeopardize “proximity talks” that play too into the radicalization – no solution – claims.
Sadly we see many practical moderates fall into this trap, attracted by the opportunity to blame their political opponents and try to convince us that Netanyahu, Abbas or Obama cannot partner for the peace so needed in our societies.
These activists are ignoring that Netanyhu, Abbas and even Obama are playing within a complex aggressive system of inner-politic, within their societies, and outer-politic, between nations. With that, confusing information is channeled to the public through a mass media driven by strong aversion to dramatize our reality. This brings many people to radicalization missing the opportunity that can be created by commitment to “proximity talks” to reduce the radicals’ influence and power.

How “Proximity talks” work:
What gives these radicals power? There is no majority for radical views, but they manage to shape the public sphere. Some criticize them for loud voices and harmful acts. I want to suggest that one very influential factor for their strength and influence comes today from the “moderate” belief in negotiation as a way to end the conflict.
Negotiations as zero sum games make each side try to get the maximum for itself; hence it usually ends with the radicalization in both sides and dissatisfaction of the weaker side. This is where the radicals get their power, as within each society the question of what we will get and how we get it translates into political claims in inner conflict.

“Proximity talks” as Talks are important for building trust, but they do not necessarily create the change, as they do not influence the social factions that do not take part in the talks. Some radical elements that are left out are using media, demonstrations and violence to claim their position.

When we step out from this paradigm and suggest “proximity talks” not as negotiation, we reflect that the Palestinians and the Israelis with the support of the US and EU know today where we are going. It is a two state solution where a Palestinian state with valid borders will emerge and enable the Palestinians to self govern and become a full member nation. Negotiation is the last thing we need. System wide planning is what we need and that cannot start till both societies engage their inner conflict: In Israel the conflict is about the settlements and in Palestine the conflict is about political cohesion.

In Israel, the inner conflict is about the settlements. One group within the Israeli society claims that Jews/Israel has a right to enlarge its territory for their historic/religious rights or for the opportunity that since a Palestinian national state never existed the international law is confusing. This group within the Israeli society has today the power to influence the governments and create Jewish settlements that blur the 1967 lines that planned to be used as a basis of the border for the Palestinian state.

Netanyahu, as an Israeli politician, cannot ignore these people as they are part of the Party electoral, but while we have these “Proximity talks,” Israel is forced to freeze the settlements. The longer we freeze the settlement the more we weaken this group and enable Israeli government to agree on valid borders for the Palestinian state and to find a solution for the settlements’ population.

In Palestine, the inner conflict is about the governance legitimacy, the group within the Palestinian society that thinks that Palestinian has a right to get back to the original pre-1948 condition. Their claim is that their historic/religious Arab rights are justified by international law. This group within the Palestinian society split itself from the Fatah agreement and is, in general, supporting Hamas factions or other radicals. This split created violent war within the Palestinian society. This is a Palestinian internal conflict for power domination; its outcome is the ability of Hamas group to hold Gaza and disable the Palestinians Authority as a representative of the whole Palestinians to sign any agreement.

Abbas cannot ignore these people as they use force and do not accept PA, but while we have these “Proximity talks” Palestinians can see freeze settlements and improvement in West Bank. The longer we freeze the settlements, the more we weaken this group and enable Palestinians to shape social agreement toward the Palestinian state and enable Fayyad to build Palestine governance, social, economic capacities.

Both internal challenges need to be resolved in order to enable progress toward the next stage of signing agreements and mapping and declaring Palestinian state.

This is why “proximity talks” serve us. They can lead to the entrance of Kadima to the Israeli coalition, creating a government that can make courageous decisions for Israel while Fayyad also creates major changes in the West Bank and the PA manages to provide more and more needed social services as education, improved economy and security that weaken the Hamas position.

So what we can get from “proximity talks”:
The more we hold “proximity talks” we will see settlements in Israel defused and Palestinian acceptance for Palestinian national unity agreement. This will come after some violent eruption; we cannot avoid it. The more potent the change is, the more it attracts reactions from radicals. For the long-term, this is what it takes for cooling down the flames that the radicals create. Cooling down the radicals will enable us, as one system of Palestinians and Israelis, to end the settlement activity, creating new political structure in Palestine. This internal transformation in our societies will open a new gate for a new era in Palestine, Israel and the Middle East.