Jews and Muslims unite against Jerusalem Museum of Tolerance By Nir Hasson
A new Jewish-Muslim initiative is seeking to derail the planned Museum of Tolerance, which is currently being built in Jerusalem on the site of a former Muslim cemetery.

The initiative's hopes to get the site declared ritually impure under Jewish law, due to the fact that the construction has involved unearthing the remains of hundreds of Muslims. Such a declaration would keep religious Jews from visiting the museum.

The proposal has already received the blessing of Rabbi David Schmidl, head of the ultra-Orthodox Atra Kadisha organization, which fights against the desecration of Jewish graves. Its Jewish sponsors - who include two left-wing activists plus one activist from the ultra-Orthodox Shas party - are also seeking support from Chief Sephardic Rabbi Shlomo Amar, but he has not yet replied to their letter.

more...>>>

---

 

  
Common Ground News Service - Middle East
 

---

 

The Palestinian-Israeli Textbook War

by Gershon Baskin

25 June 2009

JERUSALEM - Over the years, significant criticisms have been levelled at Palestinian textbooks for carrying messages that are not conducive to creating a culture of peace. Much less attention has been paid to Jewish-Israeli textbooks but they too deserve in-depth analysis and criticism.

In both Palestinian and Jewish-Israeli textbooks, the historical narratives presented contain strong elements of mutual non-recognition. The problem is compounded by the fact that officials from both sides, sensing that the “textbook war” is just another means for demonising the other, refuse to accept the criticism and tend to respond defensively rather than substantively.

Palestinian textbooks do not explicitly incite against Israel or Jews, just as Israeli textbooks do not explicitly incite against Palestinians or Islam. But both contain confused messages. It is easy to infer implied assumptions on both sides that the other nation should not exist and that this is essentially the political goal of the governments of the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel. Assuming that this is not the case, the textbooks need to be revised.

more...>>>

Click here to read the text in Arabic

Click here to read the text in Hebrew

 

 

---

 

Encountering Peace: Dressing up the Palestinian state

Jun. 22, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

OK, Binyamin Netan-yahu said the magic words "Palestinian state," now what? I want to give our prime minister the benefit of doubt and say that he even meant it; at least that is what he told US President Barack Obama. Where do we go from here? How do those words become transformed into reality? Let's try to imagine.

 

Let us assume for a moment that the Palestinians accept all of Netanyahu's conditions - their state will be demilitarized, it will have no effective control of its external borders, its airspace, seaport, electromagnetic sphere. The Palestinians will agree to define the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The sovereignty of the Palestinian state will be more limited than the sovereignty of almost any other state. So be it (for the purpose of argument at least). Now Mr. Netanyahu, I have some questions for you regarding your vision of this Palestinian state.

 

You say that Jerusalem will remain the eternal undivided capital of the State of Israel. What do you propose to do with the almost 300,000 Palestinians who live in our undivided capital? Do you grant them full citizenship? Do they get a passport? Can they vote for Knesset members? They have never enjoyed equal rights in the city of Jerusalem since 1967. Municipal records clearly prove that NIS 1 is allocated for each Palestinian Jerusalemite for the NIS 7 allocated for Jews.

More...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering Peace: What Netanyahu's peace initiative must say

Jun. 8, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

US President Barack Obama's Cairo speech and subsequent remarks by him and other senior US officials have made it clear beyond any doubt that the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is two states for two peoples. There is no other solution. Today only three countries in the world are in opposition to it: Iran, Libya and Israel.

 

I am not so sure that the people of Israel really wish to belong to this club or rejectionists. The creation of an independent, democratic and peaceful Palestinian state is in the interest of the Jewish people, the State of Israel and the Zionist movement. It is high time that the government take up the challenge of presenting its own peace initiative that will work with the international community, rather than against it, in fulfilling the will of the international community in bringing about an end to the conflict.

 

The initiative must of course not only present the threat perceptions of Israel and the real threats that a Palestinian state may create, but constructive and pragmatic proposals on how to confront those threats. The international community led by the United States, Israel's closest ally and the most powerful nation in the world, will be quite forthcoming in assisting an Israel which is willing to cooperate with it in bringing about an end to the conflict.

 

PRIME MINISTER Binyamin Netanyahu has pointed to at least four real threats that a Palestinian state would create to the security of the State of Israel and its people. There are practical solutions to all of them. The Palestinian people and the international community fully understand that there are real threats. None of the threats are existential. A Palestinian state cannot challenge the power of Israel - militarily, economically or in any other way.

More (English)...>>>

More (Hebrew)...>>>

More (Arabic)...>>>

 

---

 

To the Obama Middle East Team
To the Leaders of the Quartet
To the Leaders of the Middle East Region

This is a telegraphic memo brief

 

The Making of a US-led International Peace Plan for Israel and Palestine

 

Assumptions

§         There is no chance at this time of reaching an Israeli-Palestinian bilateral negotiated agreement
 

§         Without a political framework (meaning a plan with a time-table) to end the Israeli occupation, no incremental progress will bring the desired results and will inevitably lead to another explosion

§         Economic peace is a myth, there is no money in the private sector around the world to invest, and without a significant change on the ground no sane person will invest in Palestine.

§         Palestinian security force building, training and deployment will not succeed without the political framework, especially as confrontations between the PA and Hamas increase

 

More...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: Partner or pariah?

May. 26, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

There is no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict other than "two states for two peoples." Any other proposal guarantees the continuation of the conflict and the end of the Zionist enterprise, the State of Israel.

 

There are those on the Left who think that the two-state solution is no longer viable. They are suggesting that the Palestinian people be deprived of the stage of normal national development and denied the ability to take responsibility for their own future. These do-gooders and dreamers are ready to deny Palestinians the same rights that all other nation-states have (including Israel) to a territorial dimension on which they can express their culture, heritage, language and visions for their future as a people. For the most part, these people are anti-Israeli and are actively working for Israel's destruction.

 

Those on the Right who think Israel can continue to hold on to the West Bank under full occupation are damning it to become an apartheid state that will be rejected and boycotted by the international community. It will cease to be the place where anyone with an appreciation for human rights and dignity will be able to live. These people are working for Israel's destruction in the name of Zionism, but in reality they are much more like the Zealots of Masada who are leading the Jewish people and the country to collective national suicide.

More...>>>

 

---

 

Encountering Peace: But What about Iran?

 

By: Gershon Baskin

There is a great deal of speculation around regarding what President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu will say to each other when they finally meet on May 17.  In fact, no one in the media really knows. Netanyahu has not released his foreign policy plans vis-à-vis the Palestinians. Obama’s team hasn’t yet finished their homework and has not released any details of what their plans are. 

There have been very few statements made by both sides that might provide some indications but nothing that provides enough to really know for sure. Obama's National Security Adviser, retired General James Jones, reiterated remarks made by other senior US officials linking the resolution of the Iranian nuclear threat to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Netanyahu has stated that Iran is the main problem in the Middle East, not the Palestinians.

Since speculation has become an accepted form of journalism, I would like to add my own to what has already been written. Reports have indicated that he will tell Obama that the Iranian threat must be dealt with before any real action can be taken on the issue of Syria or regarding the Palestinians.

Insisting that Iran is the main problem, Netanyahu will assert that the Palestinian house is divided and their leadership is weak and no “top-down” progress can be made.  Look at Olmert – he really wanted to reach an agreement and couldn’t.  I, Netanyahu, don’t believe that it is possible to reach any agreement with the Palestinians.  They won’t even recognize our rights to exist as a Jewish state.

More...>>>

---

 

 

Will Israelis ever accept the Arab Peace Initiative?

Gershon Baskin

Public opinion research into what would motivate Israelis to accept making significant concessions, such as those called for in the Arab Peace Initiative, take us back to a notion of a ‘true partnership'.

6 - 05 - 2009

 

After 16 years of Israeli-Palestinian bilateral negotiations for peace there is a growing realisation that there is very little likelihood of a bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiated agreement. This realisation seems equally evident in Jerusalem, Ramallah, Brussels, Moscow and now in Washington.  Everyone appears to be searching for a new formula for peace and in that search the Arab Peace Initiative has once again reappeared as a possible saviour. The positive statements regarding the Arab Peace Initiative (API) by President Obama and members of his team have again placed it centre stage.

 

Six years after it was first presented, the Arab peace initiative may finally be coming of age. Previous Israeli leaders have basically trashed the API in its present form for many reasons. One of the main reasons is that it mentions UN Resolution 194 which is the foundation of the Arab claims for the right of return of refugees from the 1948 war to their homes inside of Israel.

 

Additional Israeli objections include the direct reference in the Initiative to the June 4, 1967 borders. Israel rightly claims that in negotiations regarding these with the Palestinians, the principle of territorial exchange has already been accepted, so why as far as Israel is concerned go back to 1967 borders which ignore any of the new realities on the ground and consequently can have only a very tenuous nature? The new Israeli right-wing Government of Binyamin Netanyahu completely rejects the idea of return to the 1967 borders.  The most objectionable and perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of the API for Israelis is the sense that this is a ‘take it or leave document' and if this is the case, the majority of Israelis say ‘leave it'.
 

More...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering peace: Education for peace - who will stand up to the challenge? Part II

Apr. 27, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

A peace process occurs between nations transferring them from a state of war between enemies to a state of peace between partners. A successful peace process requires a shift of attitudes in a cross section of the society and must be built between the peoples. This lengthy process also requires formal education that should take place through the educational system.

 

Education is a powerful agent of change and socialization into society's values; unfortunately, it sometimes also acts as a transmitter of conflict-producing and conflict-sustaining myths. Hence the need for serious and systematic educational approaches that teach conflict-solving values and skills and brings together Israeli and Palestinian teachers and students, on equal footing, to encourage discussion, to empower both sides and to emphasize the role of education as an agent of change. This process empowers the teachers to use their newly learned skills in their classrooms with generations of students to come.

 

Textbooks and curricula are determined and issued by governments. Textbooks reflect the official values that societies wish to impart to their citizens. Beyond the main task of ministries of education to provide the young people with international standards and high levels of academic education, the Israeli and Palestinian Authority ministries of education also face the significant task of providing their children with a strong values-based education aimed at building their respective society and the future of their states. An essential aspect of this values-based education is imparting and building the national identity with all of its many facets. This kind of task is complicated under the best circumstances, and when faced with a 100-year violent conflict with the neighbors, it becomes extremely problematic and difficult.

More...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: The first in a two-part series on what Israelis and Palestinians teach their young

Apr. 20, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

One of the most amazing things about the Oslo peace process is that since the creation of the Palestinian Authority in 1994, the ministers of education of Israel and the PA have never met. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will meet with President Mahmoud Abbas. Defense Minister Ehud Barak will continue to meet with PA Prime Minister Salaam Fayad. Other Israeli and PA ministers will continue to meet, but the ministers of education - no meetings will take place between them.

 

Former education minister Yuli Tamir was more than willing to meet her PA counterpart, Dr. Lamis Alami. But Alami replied that she is serving in a technocrat government whose job is to make sure that the educational system is working, not to get into matters of a controversial nature, such as curriculum content. Even peace-minded Fayad was approached to assist in arranging a meeting, but no progress took place.

 

Former PA minister of education Naim Abu Hummous told me, as I was leaving a meeting with Yasser Arafat where I raised the issue of peace education, that the issue of Palestinian textbooks and how they present Israel is a matter in the hands of the PA president, not the minister of education.

 

It is important to note that the issue of Palestinian textbooks has been highly exaggerated. The textbooks are more problematic in what they do not contain rather than how they actually present Israel, Jews, history, maps, etc. From this standpoint, Israeli textbooks are not much better.

More...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: Multilateral engagement, involvement and imposition

Apr. 7, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Is the new government on a collision course with the US? It would seem so. President Barack Obama and his secretary of state have let Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu know in no uncertain terms that the two-states-for-two-peoples solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the only plan on the table. In a statement appearing on the Web page of the Foreign Ministry, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated: "We will act exactly according to the road map, including the Tenet document and the Zinni document. I voted against the road map, but that was the only document approved by the cabinet and by the Security Council - I believe it was Resolution 1505. It is a binding resolution and binds this government as well."

Lieberman further stated in interviews that he is obligated to the "road map as the government of Israel voted" implicitly referring to the 14 reservations decided by the Sharon government on May 25, 2003. Those reservations emptied the road map of its primary content and watered down all of Israel's obligations. In response, US officials, including president George W. Bush and secretary of state Colin Powell declared that both sides would be obligated to fulfill the road map as it was drafted.
More...>>>

---

 

 

IPCRI Founder and Co-CEO Dr. Gershon Baskin is coming to the US

on a cross-country speaking and fundraising tour

May 2-21, 2009

Call to help set up speaking engagements and meetings

 

 

READ MORE...>>>

---

 

Think tank says battle against works at Museum of Tolerance not over yet

Mar. 30, 2009
Etgar Lefkovits , THE JERUSALEM POST

A Canadian-funded Israeli-Palestinian think tank held a public event Monday against the construction of the Museum of Tolerance at its planned central Jerusalem site, despite a High Court ruling allowing it to be built there.

The event, organized by the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information, came five months after construction resumed at the site, which partially covers a Muslim cemetery, in keeping with last year's unanimous ruling.

The two-hour discussion, which was held at an east Jerusalem hotel and included a four-member panel that opposed the construction, was part of an afternoon discussion series "made possible by the support of the government of Canada," according to an e-mail the organization sent out.

An Israeli lawyer for the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, which is building the museum, was not allowed to be part of the panel and was only permitted to voice his opinion in the question-and-answer session that followed the event.

A spokeswoman for the Canadian Embassy in Tel Aviv had no immediate comment on Monday.

MORE...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: Far-fetched - but not beyond imagination

Mar. 30, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu. Your recent statements indicating your intention to be a true partner to the Palestinians in advancing peace through negotiations is what the international community wants to hear. But more than wanting to hear positive statements on your intentions to make peace, the international community want to see progress on the ground.

 

The international community is quite united on this issue, more than you remember from the last time you sat in the PM's chair, and it's not only those anti-Israeli Europeans. US President Barack Obama also wants to see your commitment to making peace with the Palestinians and beware, Obama is truly interested in a multilateral foreign policy. The Quartet - the invention of the Bush administration to provide the US with a veto vis-à-vis Israel, will now act in a very different way. The US is determined to work in full cooperation with the other Quartet members - the EU, the UN and Russia. The US will even encourage the other partners to take initiatives - in coordination with each other, so that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process can be resumed, and this time, completed.

 

The international community is not interested in another long, drawn out Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Israel might be in love with peace processes and negotiations, but this time the world wants to see results, not more negotiations. After 18 years of peace processes since the Madrid Conference, there are some issues which, in the eyes of the international community, are no longer under negotiation - they are clear and must be expressed already in peace agreements.

MORE...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering peace: Olmert's scorecard - failure!

Mar. 23, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Israel's prime ministers are judged by their performance on issues of peace and security. On these issues, Ehud Olmert was one of the worst prime ministers in Israel's history. Ironically, this statement, as harsh as it is, probably finds great deal of consensus across Israel's divergent political map. Each part of the political map in Israel has its own reasons for giving Olmert such low grades. I will focus on mine.

Is Israel closer to peace following Olmert than we were prior to his falling into the prime minister's chair? The answer is a definite "no." Before the 2006 elections Olmert promised that by 2010 he would set Israel's final borders. This was a promise that Israel would have internationally recognized borders on its east, with the Palestinians and in the north, with Syria. Olmert promised to make every effort to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority President in search for an agreement.

 

In the Bush-initiated Annapolis summit of November 2007 Olmert delivered one of the best Israeli peace speeches ever made by an Israeli head of state. Here are some of his best remarks: "I came here today not in order to settle historical accounts between us and you about what caused the confrontations and the hatred, and what for many years has prevented a compromise, a settlement of peace. I want to tell you from the bottom of my heart that I acknowledge… your people, too, have suffered for many years; and there are some who still suffer. We know that this pain and this humiliation are the deepest foundations which fomented the ethos of hatred toward us. We are not indifferent to this suffering. We are not oblivious to the tragedies that you have experienced.

MORE...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering Peace: Political dead ends

Mar. 10, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

There are those who want and can't, those who don't want and can, those who don't want and can't, and there are those who want and can. Mahmoud Abbas has been one of those who wanted and couldn't, as was Ehud Olmert. Binyamin Netanyahu is probably one who doesn't want but can. A Palestinian national unity government, should it come to life, will also be one that doesn't want but could. The Obama administration is definitely one that wants and can, but what will it do in the face of those in the Middle East who so clearly don't want?

Netanyahu offers us his plan of "economic peace" - the logic is sound and rational, but it completely ignores the fact that there is nothing logical at all about Middle Eastern politics. He says, let's allow and encourage the Palestinians to develop their economy. Let's ensure that they have jobs and a chance for prosperity, so that the Palestinians have something to lose, a reason to fight terror and to become peaceful neighbors. Only once the Palestinians provide Israel with security will Netanyahu be ready to speak to them about other political issues like statehood with limited sovereignty.

 

But who will invest in Palestine without a political horizon? With the global economic crisis, who has money to invest and risk in a place with almost no hope? Will Netanyahu remove the roadblocks and open up movement and access for Palestinian businesses - the same ones that Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak refused to open? We all know that he has a short historical memory - perhaps he should be reminded that the two intifadas exploded on us at times when there was more economic growth, more jobs, more investments and a more promising economic horizon that at any other time prior to that.

 

Despite the economic promise, Palestinians were willing to lose those personal economic gains for national goals, pride and dignity. They chose to fight for real statehood and freedom from occupation. Netanyahu may be able to make a few Palestinian collaborators richer, but his economic "peace plan" will never provide security if it is detached from a genuine political peace plan that will end the occupation and enable the Palestinians to establish their independent state next to Israel.

MORE...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering Peace: Bibi or Tzipi, Bibi and Tzipi - what does it really matter?

Feb. 23, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Does it really make a difference what the various potential coalition partners believe on cardinal issues facing the country today? The government of Ehud Olmert believed in a negotiated peace process based on the road map, eventually leading to the creation of a Palestinian state as articulated at the Annapolis Conference. All of the parties that made up the Olmert government supported this goal, yet the government under Olmert didn't even begin to implement its road map obligations.

 

The road map stated: "Israel takes all necessary steps to help normalize Palestinian life. Israel withdraws from Palestinian areas occupied from September 28, 2000 and the two sides restore the status quo that existed at that time, as security performance and cooperation progress. Israel also freezes all settlement activity, consistent with the Mitchell Report."

 

On settlements the road map states explicitly: "Government of Israel immediately dismantles settlement outposts erected since March 2001. Consistent with the Mitchell Report, GOI freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements)."

Olmert's government did redeploy outside of some of the Palestinian cities, but kept its right to enter those cities unilaterally at any time it chose, in addition to demanding that Palestinian security forces disappear every evening after midnight. On settlements, the government didn't do anything. Instead, the Olmert government continued intensive settlement growth, even in areas beyond the separation barrier.

MORE...>>>

---

 

 

Encountering Peace: Spins and lies: Schalit, Hamas and Olmert

Feb. 9, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Several weeks ago I wrote that the war in Gaza "may have really been a 'war of no choice.'" Following the recent leaks from the talks about the "imminent" release of Gilad Schalit, I have decided to expose what I already knew before the war began.

 

Two weeks before Israel launched its attack on Gaza in response to a breakdown of the tahadiyeh (the cease-fire) with three weeks of barrages of Kassam rockets and mortar shells against its civilian population, I had met with a senior Hamas personality in a European capital. This person is connected and in contact with the Hamas leadership in Gaza and in Damascus. Over the past 950 days since the abduction of Schalit, he has transmitted messages for me back and forth to the Hamas leadership in Damascus, including a letter from Noam Schalit to Khaled Mashaal on September 8, 2006 that led to the release of the first sign of life from Gilad, which was received by the Egyptians on September 9, 2006.

 

We spent several hours talking about the conditions to renew the tahadiyeh. Since the abduction of Schalit on June 25, 2006, my involvement behind the scenes has been in holding unofficial talks with various Hamas leaders in Gaza, Damascus and elsewhere, all seeking to advance the negotiations to bring Gilad home. For two and half years I have been trying to bring about a direct secret back-channel bypassing third party mediators in order to speed up the process.

MORE...>>>

---

לו גלעד היה בבית

קשה לדעת כיצד גלעד שליט היה מצביע, אילו היה בבית. ספק אם היה נותן את קולו למי מהפוליטיקאים, שהיו מעורבים במגעים על עסקת שליט. למשמע הסיפור הבא, ייתכן שהיה מצביע לתנועה הירוקה-מימד - שאחד ממייסדיה גרשון בסקין -המנכ"ל המשותף של איפקר"י (מכון מחקר ישראלי-פלסטיני) - העמיד במשך כשנתיים את מרצו וקשריו עם כמה מראשי החמאס לרשות משפחת שליט.

"שבועיים לפני המלחמה נפגשתי באירופה עם גורם בכיר בחמאס", משחזר בסקין, "ארבעה ימים לפני המלחמה העברתי לראש הממשלה, לשר הביטחון ולשרת החוץ הצעה שקיבלתי ממנו לפתיחת ערוץ ישיר וחשאי עם החמאס. ההצעה נועדה לקדם הסכמה לגבי חידוש הפסקת האש לפרק זמן ארוך, פתיחת המעברים, כולל רפיח, ושחרור שליט כנגד שחרור אסירים פלסטינים. איש מהם לא הגיב. יומיים לפני פתיחת המבצע הקרקעי העברתי להם שוב את ההצעה, ושוב לא זכיתי לתגובה".
עוד...>>>

---

If Gilad were home

It's hard to know how Gilad Shalit would be voting today, had he come home in time. It is doubtful that he would be casting has ballot for any of the politicians who have been in on the secret of the contacts with the enemy concerning the Shalit deal. Upon hearing the true story, it is quite possible that Shalit would in fact be voting for the Green Movement-Meimad, of which one of the founders is Gershon Baskin.

For the past two years and more, the co-CEO of the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information has put his energy and his connections with some of the heads of Hamas at the disposal of the Shalit family.

"Two weeks before the war," relates Baskin, "I passed along to the prime minister, the defense minister and the foreign minister a proposal that I had received from it to open a direct and secret channel with Hamas. The proposal was aimed at advancing agreement with regard to renewing the cease-fire for a long period, opening the crossing points, including Rafah, and Shalit's release in return for the release of Palestinian prisoners. None of them responded. Two days before the ground operation began I transmitted the proposal to them again, and again I was not granted a response."
More...>>>

---

עסקת שליט: לא נתנו, קיבלו

פרשנות

_{מאת עמוס הראל ואבי יששכרוף}

שאלת המפתח בעניין העסקה המתגבשת על הפסקת אש ממושכת ברצועת עזה והחזרת גלעד שליט נוגעת ללוח הזמנים: האם מדובר בימים או בשבועות? ראש הממשלה, אהוד אולמרט, עשה שלשום מאמץ מכוון להנמיך את הציפיות לחזרתו המהירה של החייל החטוף. שלושה שרים בקבינט, שהתראיינו בכלי התקשורת, היו גלויים ואופטימיים יותר, אולם הסתפקו בהערכה ששליט ישוב בתוך שבועות. קיימת עדיין, כמובן, האפשרות שהמו"מ יעלה על שרטון ברגע האחרון. אך מבחינת התקשורת הערבית, לעומת זאת, הסיפור כמעט גמור. עיתונים ערביים מדווחים על פערי עמדות קטנים בין הצדדים ומעריכים שההסכם הסופי יגובש בתוך ימים אחדים.
עוד...>>>

---

 

ИЗРАИЛЬСКИЕ АНАЛИТИЧЕСКИЕ ЦЕНТРЫ ЗАНЯЛИ ВЕДУЩИЕ МЕСТА В МЕЖДУНАРОДНОМ РЕЙТИНГЕ

02.02.2009

Впервые составленный международный рейтинг “Go-To Think Tanks” охватил 5456 исследовательских центров по всему миру. Экспертный совет отобрал 407 лучших исследовательских центров для включения в рейтинг. 48 израильских аналитических центров, специализирующихся на политических и экономических исследованиях и на проблемах безопасности, вошли в этот список. 9 из них вошли в список 25 лучших исследовательских центров Ближнего Востока и Северной Африки.

MORE

---

 

Encountering Peace: Get ready for internationalization

Jan. 26, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Senator George Mitchell, the newly appointed Obama Administration Special Envoy to the Middle East will arrive this week in Israel and Palestine. He will present his credentials to get an update on the status of the negotiations, focusing on the aftermath of the war in Gaza. Mitchell is not new to the region or to serving as an official mediator of conflicts for an American president.

 

Mitchell's last attempt at mediating between Israel and Palestine began in the end of October 2000 following the outbreak of the second intifada. The Mitchell report which investigated the reasons behind the intifada and what steps should be taken to revert back to a non-violent peace process was published in May 2001, some eight months after the violence erupted and three months after Ariel Sharon was sitting in the Prime Minister's office. By that time (beginning in February 2001), Hamas and other terror groups had begun the barrage of suicide attacks inside of Israel and the mantra of "no partner for peace" was heard on both sides of the green line.

MORE...>>>

---

 

IPCRI - One of the leading Think Tanks in the Region

 

In what is believed to be the first-ever ranking of the world's leading public-policy research organizations, nine Israeli think tanks have been placed among the top 407. Out of 48 Israeli think tanks considered for evaluation, the nine best also made the top-25 think-tank list in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.

The 2008 Global Survey of Think Tanks, published by the University of Pennsylvania, studied 5,465 think tanks worldwide. A panel of experts nominated 407 think tanks to a list of global "Go-To Think Tanks."

The nine best Israeli think tanks that made it to the top 25 in MENA and the top 407 worldwide are: 1. The Institute for National Security Studies (No. 3 in MENA); 2. The Economic Cooperation Foundation (N. 12 in MENA); 3. The Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies (No. 15 in MENA); 4. The Van Leer Jerusalem Institute (No. 16 in MENA); 5. The Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI) (No. 17 in MENA); 6. The Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies (No. 18 in MENA); 7. The Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress (No. 19 in MENA); 8. The Reut Institute (No. 20 in MENA); and 9. The Rabin Center for Israeli Studies (No. 21 in MENA).

 

READ THE FULL REPORT

---

 

Jerusalem Bulletin - Special Edition

January 5, 2008

 

 ==========================================

 

In response to criticism of its planned (and currently under construction) “Museum of Tolerance” project in Jerusalem, the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) is circulating a document entitled “Important Facts on the Israeli Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of the Museum of Tolerance.” 

 

We agrees that the facts are important, and unfortunately they are not fully presented in the SWC document.  To clear up any confusion about these facts, once and for all, we have produced a Q & A primer entitled "Setting the Facts Straight Regarding the Museum of Tolerance."  In this document, copied below, we review all of the facts (and claims) in detail, and also provide a compendium of articles (analysis, opinion, and reporting) that may be of use to people who care as much as we do about this subject.  The document is a joint effort of Ir Amim and Americans for Peace Now (APN) and is available online at: http://www.peacenow.org/resources/publications.asp?rid=&cid=5700

 

MORE...>>>

---

Encountering Peace: The sun will come out tomorrow - or maybe not

Jan. 13, 2009
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

This may have really been a "war of no choice," however I am completely convinced that the policies implemented over the past years have led us directly to the point where we perhaps had no choice.

In 1995 a senior member of the Palestinian police force in Gaza with the rank of brigadier-general who was working in the office of the military liaison between the IDF and the Palestinian police invited me to visit him in Gaza. A.H. was one of the first Palestinian security personnel to arrive in Gaza after Oslo. He had lived most of his life outside of Palestine and for years was a fighter in the Palestinian Liberation Army, first in Jordan and later in Lebanon. As a military man, he took an instant liking to the IDF officers that he met in the early days of the preparations for the PLO takeover of Gaza and he befriended many of them.

I spent a full day with A.H. - much of the time sitting in the back of his jeep being escorted around Gaza and under the protection of his guards sitting in two other jeeps with their Kalashnikov rifles. It was quite a bizarre feeling riding all over Gaza under the protection of PLO fighters.

MORE...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: How will it end?

Dec. 29, 2008
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

The national morale is quite high. Most Israelis are thinking: How good it feels to see our side winning a war. The attack on Gaza is supported by an overwhelming majority of Israelis who are fed up with seven years of rocket attacks from Gaza. This viewpoint is quite easy to understand: We left Gaza up to the international border, we removed settlements, the army left, the occupation ended - if they continue to attack us, it is not because of the occupation, it is because they don't want us to live.

 

The Palestinian position is obviously quite different. First, with hundreds of casualties, there is the outrage at what they call the disproportionate use of force. For them each casualty is a fellow Palestinian, regardless of which movement he belonged to or supported. Our reaction as Jews would be the same, if the circumstances were reversed.

 

Palestinians claim that the occupation never ended because Israel continued to control all of the entry and exit points of Gaza, as well as the airspace and the territorial waters. They also claim that because Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza while humiliating President Mahmoud Abbas by describing him as a "chick with no feathers and a non-partner" that Hamas was able to own the narrative of victory. Hamas claimed in the elections that it had succeeded in pushing Israel out of Gaza through its constant acts of "resistance," and the Palestinian public bought it.

MORE...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: The emerging bi-national reality

Dec. 15, 2008
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

Palestinian affairs expert and longtime journalist Danny Rubenstein came to visit me a couple of evenings ago. He was researching the issue of the transfer of cash to Gaza that Defense Minister Barak had allowed. After clarifying this issue our conversation went on to discuss what Danny called the emerging "bi-national reality" that has developed in the West Bank and has become more entrenched, perhaps beyond the point of no return. Danny is one of the real experts. He's been covering Palestinian affairs since 1967, has written several highly respected books on Palestinians, their national movement and leaders. He has contacts in every part of Palestine, with all sectors of the society. His conclusion concerning the "bi-national reality" is drawn from observations over the past months after traveling north, south, east and west - all throughout the West Bank, spending hours listening to people and observing the reality on the ground.

 

I told Danny that I am not ready to give up the hope that our leaders will find the wisdom and the courage to implement the "two-state solution" before it is too late. In my heart, I had to wonder if Danny wasn't right. Perhaps it is already too late. Perhaps the events of Hebron, of the forced removal of the settlers from the building that they claim and the riots that broke out afterwards when they went on the rampage against Palestinians in Hebron demonstrates in the most bloody terms that these two communities might be too locked into a entanglement that is already beyond the possibility to untangle.

MORE...>>>

---

 

Encountering Peace: Who owns the water?

Dec. 8, 2008
Gershon Baskin , THE JERUSALEM POST

The current water crisis is extremely serious. Years of mismanagement and irresponsible water policies are now being investigated by the state comptroller. This is not the first time that the water sector is under the scrutiny of a public investigatory committee. In June 2001 the Knesset conducted a similar investigation and reported on serious dysfunctionality, but it seems that very little has changed since then.

 

For at least 10 years water experts have been calling for increased investment in developing new supplies of water, mainly through desalination. But as usual here, the real policy makers are the "Treasury boys" who opposed spending millions of shekels on infrastructure and held up the developments for a decade. They finally had to give in both because of the increase in the water deficit (we pump more than we have and we continue to pollute fresh water sources all over the country) and as a result of the very powerful desalination lobby that has greased the wheels of bureaucracy with a lot of money. Now, desalination is the answer that most of the experts give, at least the experts with the power - the water decision makers and the Treasury.

 

THE WATER crisis on the other side of the separation barrier is even more severe than in Israel proper. The Israeli-Palestinian water agreement that was signed in 1995 provided the Palestinians with increased quantities of water. The agreement was supposed to be "interim" to be followed by a permanent status agreement several years later. In the meantime, 13 years have passed, the population has grown, yet no additional allocations have been permitted.

MORE...>>>

---

Update on the Construction of the Wiesenthal Center Museum of “Tolerance” in Jerusalem

December 1, 2008

 

I pass by the site of the Muslim Cemetery in Mamilla Jerusalem where the so-called Museum of Tolerance is being constructed every morning because it is near my son’s school.  Last week I noticed some trucks entering and exiting the site so I tried to take some pictures.  I was immediately accosted by some private security guards who conspired between themselves that I had attacked them violently. They said that they were calling the police to have me arrested on charges of assault.  The photographed me and my car. I almost lost my cool, but decided “let them arrest me”. I am a public figure who has never raised a hand against anyone and has always led non-violent struggles against violence, wars and injustice. I have been arrested about 8 times before, never charged, so if I get arrested it will only bring more attention to the struggle to have the construction worked ceased. I waited for about 20 minutes for the police to come.  When I had to leave to go to work, I gave one of the security cards my business card and told him it would make it easier for the police to find me.  I guess they aren’t looking because I have not yet been arrested.

 

I want to make my point of view very clear on why I oppose this project so strongly.  In response to my last article in the Jerusalem Post against the Museum   (http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1225715340258&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull ) from November 4, 2008, many of my readers wrote letters to Rabbi Hier, the Director of the Wiesenthal center. The Wiesenthal center then put out a very convincing response with all kinds of information, some of it completely false, regarding the status of the Cemetery according to Islamic Law. For whatever reason, religious, political, sentiment, historical, etc. the overwhelming majority of Muslim leaders today, in Israel, in Palestine and in Jerusalem including the President of the Israeli Sharia Appeals Court, Qadi Dr. Ahmad Natour, do not accept the Islamic rulings brought by the Wiesenthal Center.  

 

I am not going to argue Islamic law with Rabbi Hier.  I am neither a Sheikh nor an expert scholar in Islamic Law. My argument against the Museum never had anything to do with Islamic Law, or with law in general. If the Muslim community in Jerusalem decided to build a shopping center on top of the Muslim Cemetery, I would not have anything to say about it.  It may not appeal to me, but I would not argue against it.  

MORE...>>>

---

The Idea of an Israeli-Palestinian Confederation

Wednesday Afternoons with IPCRI

19 November 2008

Meeting Transcript

Gershon Baskin welcomed everyone and apologized for the absence of Saeb Erekat and Abu Ala, who were called away by Abu Mazen for a diplomatic mission. Baskin then introduced the participants. Uri Dromi is the director of the center for ethics at Mishkenot Sha’ananim. Dr. Ephraim Sneh recently resigned from the Knesset and formed a new political party. He is a doctor by profession. He was the head of COGAT in the past, and we know him most recently as the Deputy Minister of Defense.

           
For those of you who are not familiar with the way that things work, it’s really hard to find someone that cares about the human impacts of the Occupation. We knew that when Ephraim Sneh was in the MoD that we had someone to turn to when people were stuck at checkpoints or when humanitarian crises occurred. Ephraim personally helped us on several occasions. Israel Hasson recently resigned from Yisrael Beitenu and moved over to Kadima. He used to be the Deputy Director of the Shin Bet. I’ve heard from many of my Palestinian colleagues that Yisrael was one of the more sensible negotiators at Camp David. Yisrael Hasson is a person of peace and somebody who is an asset in the Knesset. We have with us also Hanna Siniora. He is a veteran Palestinian personality, and one of the first to actually raise the idea of Confederation, mostly in the formula of Israel-Palestine-Jordan. IPCRI in the 1990’s put out a book, which is outside, just to throw the idea of Confederation out and to raise some creative thinking about what that might look like. I want to take this opportunity to thank the Government of Canada for making this possible. READ MORE...>>>