Global Policy Forum

By Amram Mitzna *

When an unofficial Israeli-Palestinian agreement, the Geneva initiative or accord, was announced at the beginning of December, there was qualified, international enthusiasm for its proposed solutions to the intractable problems of the past half-century. But the Israeli government loathes the idea and those who formulated it, while some Palestinian groups criticise its disregard for the refugees' right of return. Can it change from a radicals' dream into a reality?

If Israel's prime minister Ariel Sharon chooses to apply the Geneva initiative, he will take his place in history as the founder of a democratic Jewish state of Israel based on an agreement. It would be an even more important step than the creation of the country in 1948, since that event was unilateral and was only recognised by a few countries in the world. The Geneva initiative proves that we have a partner and that there is an alternative to bloodshed. The attacks by Sharon and his ministers in the Labour party, and the opposition to the instigators of the document show that they are scared.

Until now all attempts by the government and more broadly by the right to intimidate supporters of the initiative have failed. At first, Sharon tried to describe us as politically motivated campaigners working for the enemy. Far-right MPs called us traitors. A few even called in vain on the Attorney General to have us put on trial. On 13 November, under pressure from Sharon's office, state radio stopped broadcasting an advert telling Israelis that the Geneva document text would be posted soon to each household. Faced with political censorship, we were obliged to appeal to the Supreme Court, which will decide shortly. But neither censorship nor threats can disarm us. We shall persevere, especially since we see increasing Palestinian support for the initiative. Israeli support for what is seen as a viable alternative to the Sharon government's catastrophic policies is growing too. The initiative offers Israelis and Palestinians a way out of the dead end that has damaged every aspect of their lives.

This year there was a huge turn-out for the activities organised in November to mark the eighth anniversary of Yitzhak Rabin's assassination. This is proof that a significant part of Israeli public opinion, disappointed by Sharon's policies, is looking for another way out, which is exactly what the initiative offers.

The right and far-right bluntly refuse to discuss the matter and resort to provocation, intimidation and confrontation because they fear peace. They are worried because more and more Israelis realise that the government has been misleading them for more than three years. Sharon succeeded in convincing the people that there was no partner for dialogue, that force would crush the Palestinians and bring victory and that the Israeli army had the means to succeed. He asked Israelis to be strong and promised an end to the terror.

But the situation deteriorated. The elimination of Palestinian leaders - the government's only policy - was supposed to eradicate terror, but it is in danger of tearing apart what is left of the country. Terror is increasing, the economy collapsing, society disintegrating and demographic realities threatening the existence of the Jewish State of Israel. But none of this has prompted the government to consider other solutions.

After long months of hard work, we arrived at the initiative. Not one of us thought it would be possible to implement it overnight. We fought for every detail as though it were a real accord, although it was a fight without victims or uniforms. We battled for Jerusalem, the Temple Mount, and Gush Etzion [historic settlements south of Jerusalem]. We fought for Israel's permanent borders, and for the essence of the state's existence. And we obtained significant results.

For the first time in history, Palestinians officially declared their recognition of the State of Israel as the Jewish people's state for ever. They gave up their right of return to Israel, ensuring that our state will retain a solid and stable Jewish majority. The Wailing Wall, the Jewish Quarter and the Tower of David remain in our hands. Jerusalem will no longer be strangled by its environs, and the whole network of surrounding Jewish villages - Givat Zeev, Givon (old and new), Maale Adumim, Gush Etzion, Neve Yaakov, Pisgat Zeev, Hagiva Hatzarfatit, Ramot, Gilo and Armon Hanatziv - will be an integral part of the enlarged city for ever. No residents of these villages will have to leave their homes.

It is easy to criticise the results. Provocation, too, is easy, but merely reflects a sense of panic. There are people with whom we can talk. The government could change our lives tomorrow if only it had the will to do so. The problem is that Sharon has no desire to find an arrangement. He does not have the courage that leaders need to look to the future. He takes decisions on the basis of political considerations and bows to the will of extremists. The only nerve that he and his government show is their ability to lie and maintain that there is no other way out. Where do they find the courage to send soldiers to their deaths in a war disconnected from any reality? The initiative is like the Hans Christian Anderson story of the emperor's new clothes. We have shouted out that the emperor is actually naked. We have said clearly that the government is leading us to ruin, and its violent reaction proves the truth of what we have said: it is panic-stricken, and rightly so. A leader who leads his people to war at the risk of futile bloodshed has no legitimacy. This is now plain for all to see. Instead of explaining the reasons that prevent him from framing an agreement along these lines, Sharon provokes. He is very good at that, as he proved on Zion Square eight years ago.

The initiative is a model, not an official document binding on governments. It is a proposal towards a definitive arrangement that can be accepted by both sides. It is remarkable in two ways: it declares an end to the conflict and leaves no grey areas. Every detail has been discussed and decided without any possibility for appeal by either party. The Palestinian side would be represented by a real and wide leadership, enjoying the support of the Authority's leaders and militants on the ground. The Israeli government can apply this initiative, as it stands, straight away. It could also examine it and organise negotiations to revise it.

I hope that Israeli citizens, on learning of this initiative, will not allow themselves to be misled by the provocative behaviour of a panic-stricken government or by those who support its policies while claiming to belong to the left. The initiative is a turning point in history, since it allows the two governments should they so wish to see exactly which concessions are needed on either side to end the conflict. If the government does not implement this initiative and fails to offer another solution, we shall go on living with a sword over our heads. The decision is in our hands.

* Amram Mitzna was a general in the Israeli army and after retirement was elected mayor of Haifa in 1993. In 2002 he was elected leader of the Labour party, but resigned in May 2003 See also Why the initiative is so significant and the map : The Initiative's terms of agreement

This article was translated by Jeremiah Cullinane

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.