http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1130354.html


      A Palestinian peace plan Israelis can live with  
     
      By Bradley Burston  
     
      Tags: Israel News, Ray Hanania   
     
        
     
     

      Click here for more articles by Bradley Burston 




      Ray Hanania is a compassionate and, in fact, delightful person, with rare 
insight into the aspirations and failings of Palestinians and Israelis. In the 
eyes of many, that alone ought to disqualify him from consideration as a leader 
in the Holy Land. 

      Add to that, the fact that the acclaimed journalist also happens to be a 
first-generation Palestinian-American married to a Jewish woman, as well as a 
stand-up comedian who has appeared alongside Jewish comics, and the 
self-destructively polarized electorate of the Holy Land will need to expend 
not a whiff of thought in dismissing him out of hand. 

      Which all makes his candidacy for the president of Palestine, and the 
Mideast peace proposal that is his platform, all the more compelling. He is 
realistic about his chances ("No, I don't expect to win"). But the Hanania plan 
embodies the radicalism of the truly moderate, and deserves much more than 
cursory consideration. 

      Consider his proposal for one of the thorniest municipal quandaries in 
the West Bank. Jews who wish to live in Hebron in a future state of Palestine, 
should be allowed to do so, he writes, "and should be protected, just as 
non-Jews. In fact, for every Jewish individual seeking to live in Palestine, a 
Palestinian should be permitted to live in Israel." 

      What Hanania is proposing is a two state solution that addresses not only 
quantifiable issues, but underlying emotional grievances, and the anguish in 
the histories of both sides. Cynics, and, in particular, the extremists among 
them, will reject it out of hand as simplistic and artificially balanced. But 
if peace is ever to be made in the Holy Land, it will be made despite 
extremists and not by them. 

      The following is the text of Hanania's outline. I have taken the liberty 
of numbering the clauses, with an eye toward facilitating discussion: 

      1. I support two-states, one Israel and one Palestine. As far as I am 
concerned, I can recognize Israel's "Jewish" character and Israelis should 
recognize Palestine's "non-Jewish" character. 

      2. I oppose violence of any kind from and by anyone. I reject Hamas' 
participation in any Palestinian government without first agreeing to surrender 
all arms and to accept two-states as a "final" peace agreement. But I also 
reject allowing Israeli settlers to carry any weapons and believe Israelis must 
impose the same restrictions on them. 

      3. I can support some settlements remaining - given the reality of 42 
years of time passing - in a dunam-for-dunam land exchange. If Ariel is 500 
dunams with a lifeline from Israel, then Israel gives Palestine 500 dunams in 
exchange. 

      4. Jerusalem should be a shared city and Palestinians should have an 
official presence in East Jerusalem. The Old City should be shared by both 
permitting open access to the city to all with a joint Palestinian-Israeli 
police presence. 

      5. Palestinian refugees would give up their demand to return to pre-1948 
homes and lands lost during the conflict with Israel. Instead, some could apply 
for family reunification through Israel and the remainder would be compensated 
through a fund created and maintained by the United States, Israel, Egypt, 
Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the United Nations. 

      6. I also think Israelis should find it in their hearts to show 
compassion and offer their apologies to Palestinians for the conflict. 

      7. I support creation of a similar fund to compensate those Jews from 
Arab lands who lost their homes and lands, too, when they fled. 

      8. I think the Wall should be torn down, or relocated to the new borders. 
I have no problem separating the two nations for a short duration to help 
rebuild confidence between our two people. 

      9. All political parties, Palestinian and Israelis, should eliminate 
languages denying each other's existence, and all maps should be reprinted so 
that Israeli maps finally show Palestine and Palestinian maps finally show 
Israel. 

      10. A subway system should be built linking the West Bank portion of the 
Palestine state to the Gaza Strip portion of the Palestine State. Palestine 
should be permitted to build a seaport access to strengthen its industry, and 
an airport to permit flights and too and from the Arab and Israeli world. 

      11. I would urge the Arab World to renew their offer to normalize 
relations with Israel if Israel agrees to support the creation of a Palestinian 
State. 

      12. And I would ask both countries to establish embassies in each other's 
country to address other problems. 

      13. While non-Jewish Palestinians would continue to live in Israel as 
citizens, Jews who wish to live in settlements surrendered by Israel could 
become Palestinian citizens and they should be recognized and treated equally. 

      14. If Jews want to live in Hebron, they should be allowed to live in 
Hebron and should be protected, just as non-Jews. In fact, for every Jewish 
individual seeking to live in Palestine, a Palestinian should be permitted to 
live in Israel. In fact, major Palestinian populations in Israel could be 
annexed into Palestine (like settlements). 

      15. Another concept is to have non-Jews living in Israel continue to live 
there but only vote in Palestinian elections, while Jews living in Palestine 
would only vote in Israeli elections. A special citizenship protection 
committee could be created to explore how to protect the rights of minorities 
in each state. 

      16. Israel and Palestine should create joint-governing and security 
agencies working with the United States to monitor the peace, and establish an 
agency to pursue criminal acts of violence. 

      As in every potentially workable peace proposal, Hanania's plan has 
something in it to upset and disappoint everyone. But its underlying principle 
of compromise based on mutual respect and compassion, its openness to the needs 
and wounds of two victimized peoples, and its suggestion that grassroots 
sentiment for peace can succeed where leaders have so consistently failed, are 
surely as worthy of serious consideration, as anything currently on the table. 

     


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to