Let's go the extra mile

.

Mahmoud Abbas, a grey unremarkable figure concluding an unremarkable extended tenure as chairman/president of the Palestinian Authority has undergone a profound metamorphosis. The man described by many observers as a political has-been, a mere footnote in the annals of the

The Jezreel Valley and wooded slopes of Mt. Gilboa. . Some of the fish ponds fields and citrus groves belong to Ein Harod.

Palestinian struggle for independence, has now become the champion of that struggle.

However a number of dissenters, notable among them journalist Khaled Abu Toameh claim that Abbas is motivated by self-interest.
"He wants to go down in history as a leader who defied Israel, the US and many EU countries by asking the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state. He wants to be remembered as a leader who made a historic achievement for his people." Wrote Abu Toameh in an article published by the Hudson Institute think-tank - New York.

He says Abbas has ignored the warnings of legal experts who told him that UN recognition of a Palestinian state would nullify the PLO's status as the "sole and legitimate" representative of the Palestinian people.

Consequently, the Palestinian Liberation Organisation, which would be replaced by the state of Palestine, would no longer be able to claim that it represents the Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, the PLO would no longer be able to demand the "right of return.

"Abbas was warned," says Abu Toameh, "That the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict could be reduced to a mere dispute over territory and borders between two states, and not a national, religious or ideological confrontation. This means that the conflict would no longer center around important issues like Jerusalem, the holy sites, settlements, water and refugees.

Prior to going to New York Abbas met with his cabinet ministers, advisors and Arab leaders. Some of the people he spoke to said they feared the consequences of the UN bid.

According to unconfirmed reports Prime Minister Salam Fayyad doubted the wisdom of a unilateral step that might cause the US to cut off the $500 + million in annual aid to the Palestinian Authority.

European leaders sympathetic to the Palestinians and the two-state proposal told Abbas that his initiative would damage the peace process and further complicate the situation in the Middle East.

Abu Toameh quoted a report that King Abdullah II of Jordan advised Abbas to reconsider the statehood bid. Abdullah feared that UN recognition would result in the loss of the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees.

Like the rest of the Arab regimes, the Jordanians are afraid that a Palestinian state would mean that millions of refugees living in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon would stay in these countries. The refugees do not want to go to a Palestinian state in the 1967 territories. They want to go back to Israel, and this is what the Palestinian Liberation Organisation has been demanding. So if the PLO loses its legitimate representative status the refugees will have no one to plead their case.

Notwithstanding this Abbas went ahead with his UN bid and returned to Ramallah a conquering hero.

The Quartet's alternative proposal urging Israel and the Palestinians to renew negotiations was tentatively accepted by Prime Minister Netanyahu and tentatively rejected by Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

It would seem that Bibi is an indefatigable pursuer of peace. In his UN speech he called on Abbas to negotiate, let's talk dugri (straight). So far the talking has been anything but straight. By the same token Mahmoud Abbas seems to be intransigent, unwilling to wheel and deal with Netanyahu.

On closer examination it appears that the situation is very different. Both sides have preconditioned themselves out of negotiations. As a result it would take more than another US special ambassador or European intercessor to kick-start the negotiations again.

Commenting on the negotiations impasse Thomas L. Friedman said, “A farsighted Israeli government would say to itself: ‘We have so much more to lose than the Palestinians if all this collapses. So let’s go the extra mile. Abbas says he will not come to peace talks without a freeze on settlement-building. We think that is bogus. We gave him a 10-month partial freeze and he did nothing with it. But you know what? There is so much at stake here, let’s test him again. Let’s offer him a six-month total freeze on settlement-building. What is six months in the history of 5,000-year-old people? We already have 300,000 settlers in place. It is a win-win strategy that in no way imperils our security. If the Palestinians still balk, they will be the ones isolated, not us. And, if they come, who knows? Maybe we cut a deal.’”

He’s right, so right!

So what does our government do? Barely a week after the UN speeches and the Quartet’s call to refrain from provocative actions, we announce the building of 1,100 units in Gilo. The announcement met with condemnation by the US, UK and the EU. They referred to Gilo as a settlement while an Israeli government spokesman referred to it as a suburb in the heart of Jerusalem.

Prior to 1967 Gilo was a hill on the Jordanian side of the 1949 armistice lines.

Now it is part of the greater Jerusalem municipal area annexed by Israel. It is in fact a Jewish suburb with a population of 40,000. Considering that the proposed addition is in the preliminary planning stage the announcement is indeed provocative.

According to an Israeli municipal planner, most Gilo land had been legally purchased by Jews before World War II, much of it during the 1930s. Jewish landowners had not relinquished their ownership of their land when the area was captured by the Jordanians in the 1948 War.

I doubt if it would be wise to table the land ownership deeds. If we do a host of displaced Arabs are likely to present ownership deeds for land in other suburbs in the “heart of Jerusalem.”

.

Describing the speeches at the UN Friedman said, “Honestly, it is hard to decide whose speech was worse. Netanyahu’s read like a pep rally to the Likud Central Committee. Abbas’s read like an address to an Arab League meeting. Obama’s read like an appeal to Jewish voters in Florida. The president meant well, but domestic politics required that he whisper where he once spoke bold truths to both sides.”

Surveying the moribund peace process and how any form of direct contact between the parties is once more perceived as a goal, a very elusive goal, Friedman said, “That is, indeed, where we are — questioning whether the two sides will even talk to each other anymore, let alone negotiate an implementable deal. Yet both sides act as if time is on their side. I beg to differ……

If clashes erupt between Israelis and Palestinians today, there is no President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt to absorb the flames. Now there is a Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, ready to fan them — toward Israel. It is not an exaggeration to say that if serious clashes erupted between Israelis and Palestinians, both the peace treaties between Egypt and Israel and Egypt and Jordan could be undermined.”

The Economist said, “The Israeli government, however, argues that the Palestinian bid is a huge and potentially tragic mistake. ‘The only way to achieve a Palestinian state and peace is through direct negotiations,’ stated an Israeli official, adding that the Palestinians have not ‘seriously’ engaged in talks for the past three years. The mistake would become ‘irrevocable’, he added, if a resolution passed in the General Assembly prescribes a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

Palestinians respond that Netanyahu is not ready to negotiate a two-state agreement. One of his demands, that the Palestinians must first recognise Israel as a Jewish state, seems intended merely to prevent talks restarting.

Many Europeans and Americans wonder whether Mr Netanyahu is himself a dyed-in-the-wool rejectionist, or is simply in thrall to the ultra-nationalists in his coalition.”

The “Conflict” viewed from any point outside the Middle East is difficult to comprehend. It’s hard to understand all this squabbling over a narrow sliver of arid coastline. On the other hand it’s difficult to equate Mark Twain’s uncomplimentary descriptions of the Holy Land he visited in the late 1860s with the landscapes tourists see today. The swamps and wastelands have been transformed. Admittedly the climate here is described as mainly arid, however the little water available has been distributed better. The National Water Carrier, a major engineering project brings water from the Sea of Galilee to arid areas in the south. Agriculture has been expanded to an enormous extent. This once backwater of the Ottoman Empire now exports agricultural and horticultural products.

The National Water Carrier project has its downside too. Pumping water from the Sea of Galilee has adversely affected the sea’s (lake) water quality. Furthermore, the Dead Sea deprived of a lot of water from the Jordan River is drying up.

Now this negative aspect of our water economy is about to undergo a fundamental change. It will cost a lot of money, but it will be money well spent.

Over the next forty years Israel will invest USD 54 billion in the development of water installations, but will also be in a position to do so without raising the cost of water to the consumer, according to the blueprint plan for water development recently approved by the Water Authority Council.

The plan also proposes the creation of desalination plants on offshore man-made islands because of the difficulty in finding land for building such plants on the beaches of our short coastline.

Based on the new plan, expanding the availability of water in Israel will focus on desalination plants. This will make it possible to draw less water from natural water sources, thereby allowing them to be restored to higher levels

The focus on desalination also lessens the risks posed by higher reliance on water resources like the Sea of Galilee.

The amount of water allocated to agriculture will not drop, however it will be based on purified sewage and non-potable water drawn from water holes. I hasten to add that our sewerage purification plants are among the most efficient in the world. Although the purified waste is used for irrigation it meets all the standards set for potable water.

According to the Water Authority Council’s calculations Israel will require an additional 1.5 billion cubic metres of water, in the coming years.

Since Israel controls the headwaters – the Yarmuk and Jordan rivers, it is obliged to supply water to the very dry Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. In fact about a third of the additional water required will be supplied to Jordan and the Palestinian Authority.

As soon as some of the planned desalination plants are in production there will be a reduced reliance on the National Water Carrier. More water will flow in the Jordan River and the situation of both the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea will be much improved.

Maybe I should have added a wish for peace in the New Year wishes I sent to friends and family. On second thoughts I think that is too much to hope for.

Instead I’ll settle for an abundance of water.

Beni 29^th of September, 2011.