|
Sen. Dianne Feinstein
April 15, 2002
Sen. Feinstein,
I have read your speech to the Senate Floor, and am thrilled with your suggested
starting place for Peace Negotiations. As a consistent supporter of Democratic
Candidates, I find your proposal is challenging to both sides, and is
courageous.
I see that on the eve of the AIPAC Convention in Washington D.C., you have
suggested a plan that calls for elimination of the Israeli Settlements. I salute
you!
I see that you are a friend of Peace, as well as Israel. I agree that the
Settlements are an obstacle to peace. I find your flourish, standing as a friend
of Israel and telling it like it is, quite refreshing.
I take issue with some remarks you made in the speech, indeed I was beginning to
feel you had uncritically repeated propaganda when you said that Barak had
offered Arafat 97% of the 1967 Palestinian Territories.
I have enclosed a map that seeks to construct the deal that Barak offered. No
official map was ever supplied by Clinton, or by Barak, but references to known
roads and settlements, and rules for building buffer zones, and
"leasing" territories were made. Perhaps the State Department or your
own Staffers can find similar maps from Administration or State Department
sources?
Orient House's Jerusalem Task Force composed the map. I found this by searching
the World Wide Web. (http://galton.uchicago.edu/~amit/MIDE/pmap.jpeg). It is
representative of a number of maps I found.
On this map you will see that wide swaths of land are annexed by Israel to
legitimize and protect concentrations of Israeli Settlements. Estimates show
this to be 10% of the 1967 Palestinian Territory.
You will also see buffer zones on the Jordanian Border, including the Tourist
Zone around the Dead Sea. I went there on my one stay in Israel, and, while
development was sparse, it could expand greatly once Peace is established.
These buffer zones constitute another 10% of the 1967 Territories.
Note also that the networks of "bypass roads" which serve Israeli
Settlements deep inside the West Bank are also Israeli zones of control. This is
only a few percent of the Territory, yet it is impossible to travel from Hebron
to Jenin without going through 7 or more Israeli Check Points. The journey from
Bethlehem to Jericho looks quite difficult as well.
One spot in East Jerusalem is a neighborhood ceded to Palestinian control. It is
surrounded by Israeli Annexation of East Jerusalem, say over 95% of it.
Your speech suggested that Barak proposed to retain only 3% of the 1967 lands.
This map, and any map you can get from objective sources, shows that 20%, is
what Barak wanted to keep.
More significant, the location of that 20% divides Palestine into 4 separate
chunks (counting Gaza), each of which are further subdivided by Highways Annexed
by Israel. Look further, and the light green areas were proposed by Israel to be
"leased" for an indefinite period, reducing the immediate grant of
land to less than 40%. It is difficult to estimate by eye, it could be as small
as 30%. The lease is dangerous. Ask policy analysts who understand extremist
Israeli and Palestinian communities.
I am convinced that you mean to be fair. I ask you to consider this information,
get better-confirmed information, and correct this much repeated assertion that
Barak offered 97% of the Territories. Virtually every U.S., and Israeli
Politician repeats this figure. It is demonstrated to be wrong.
Not only is it factually wrong, it represents a collective coercion of the facts
by the powerful side of the agreement against the least powerful side of the
agreement.
If you are a student of Franz Kafka, you will understand the feelings of
isolation, humiliation, and hopelessness that can be summoned by this type of
irrational coercion.
Beyond the hopelessness, it is the death of trust, and contributes to
abandonment of rationality by all sides.
Also, you never mentioned that a significant bloc of Ehud Barak's coalition had
pulled out of his government BEFORE he arrived at Camp David. Barak was
negotiating without a Mandate.
For Arafat to risk his leadership and his very life over such a shoddy, and
unreliable offer is too much to ask. And what point is there for Arafat to offer
anything more than UN Resolution 242 et. al., which looks very much like what
you appended to your speech?
While you gave recognition that Arafat cannot control Hamas or Islamic Jihad,
who author 30% to 60% of the Suicide Bombings, and Terrorist Attacks, you gave
no recognition to the likelihood that these elements could eliminate Arafat if
he incurred significant unpopularity with the Palestinian Street.
I find it murderous to expect Arafat to take a courageous stand over lop-sided
plan, as the Palestinian Street flocks to Hamas and Jihad, both of which seek
only to disrupt the Peace Process.
Furthermore, you made no mention of Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, and the
use of live ammunition to put down rioting on the Temple Mount. Both of these
choices contributed the seed from which second Intifada blossomed.
I understand that in Politics you must resort to some palliative rhetoric, to
get the attention of the swing votes. Perhaps you got the attention of the
staunch, and blind supporters of Israel. That is a good thing, for the purpose
of having your speech heard, and opening minds enough to consider your policy
suggestion.
That has been done.
And now that it is done, please make yourself one of the voices that is
correcting, and rebalancing the record.
Redwood City , CA
|
