October 1996, p. 56

Waging Peace

PNA Abuses May Lead to Civil Strife

Discontent over human rights violations and Palestinian National Authority (PNA) security measures could lead to a large-scale revolt by Palestinians, according to Labib Kamhawi, vice president of the Arab Organization of Human Rights in Jordan. Kamhawi told an Aug. 23 audience at the Washington, DC-based Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine, that arrests, detentions and killings have created considerable “grass-roots” sentiment against the nine-month-old government of Yasser Arafat.

“The Israelis have always been more violent as an occupation force, but there is now an imminent threat of civil unrest,” Kamhawi said, adding that a rebellion against the PNA would be much more traumatic for Palestinians than a rebellion against Israeli occupation. “When you revolt against the Israelis it’s called intifada, but when you revolt against the PNA it is civil war.”

Since the February and March Hamas bombings in Israel, Palestinian police have taken drastic security measures aimed at cracking down on any opposition to the Arafat government. The measures have taken the form of beatings, detentions, mass arrests, and closed-court midnight trials. Kamhawi said the abuses became more frequent following the March 13 terrorism summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. At the meeting, the United States and Israel pressured Arafat to take action against agitators who may harm Israeli security. Arafat, however, seems to have stepped over the line between enforcing security and abusing his people.

“Arafat included in this mandate all political opponents and critics of his regime,” Kamhawi said. “Palestinian human rights were the victim of the peace process.”

Instead of creating the groundwork for a stable and civil society, Arafat is “laying down the foundations and institutions for a police state,” Kamhawi added.

The writer and human rights activist added, however, that American and Israeli policies have made Arafat’s position considerably more difficult. Israeli-implemented closures, the continued jailing of Palestinian activists, and the general humiliation of living under Israeli occupation continue to plague life in Palestinian self-rule areas. America’s deep concern for Israeli terror victims, while ignoring Palestinian victims of Israeli policies, also undermines Palestinian confidence in the peace process. Kamhawi said these factors make it difficult to keep young discontented Palestinians away from violence and terror. “Desperation and loss of hope is a prime reason for the instigation of violence and acts of violence,” he said.

After decades of foreign rule—first under Ottoman Turkish authorities, then under the British and Jordanians, and finally under Israeli occupation —the PNA abuses of police power have been especially disheartening to Palestinians. The July 31 beating death of 26-year-old Fatah activist Mahmoud Jumayal and the repeated arrests of human rights leader Eyad Serraj by the PNA have led some to believe that Palestinian rule may prove to be as oppressive as foreign occupation.

“Palestinians have always hoped that theirs would be a model for democracy for all Arabs,” Kamhawi said. “But [the Arafat government] has embarked and expanded on an undemocratic path.”

The United States and Israel could aid the development of Palestinian society by encouraging Arafat to hold to international human rights standards, he said. These countries could also give the PNA the financial and political support it needs to create a better life for Palestinians. Without these changes, however, a future Palestine may be very undemocratic and unstable.

“These human rights abuses are destined to grow into a general policy unless people take notice and do something about it,” Kamhawi added.

—Geoff Lumetta

CPAP Hosts Israeli Arab Parliamentarian

The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine hosted Walid Sadik for a presentation entitled “An Inside View of the Future” on Sept. 4. Sadik, an Israeli Arab Knesset member of the dovish Meretz party since 1992, spoke about the role of Israeli Arabs in Israel’s government, and about the fate of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process since the election of Binyamin Netanyahu’s Likud government last May 31.

Comparing the role of Israeli Arabs in Israeli politics under recent Labor and Likud governments, Sadik said that the government of Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres “was the first government to deal with Israeli Arabs on equal terms,” not because of the Labor Party’s fondness for Israeli Arabs, but because the Arabs were members of the ruling coalition government. This inclusion in political decision-making did not, however, include participation in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Sadik said that there is an apparent belief among Israel’s Jewish citizens that “only Jews can negotiate for peace on behalf of Israel.”

Since the election of the Likud Party, Sadik said that he is “more pessimistic than ever,” because “all that the Israelis are concerned with now is maintaining the status quo.” He was particularly critical of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who he said “has no experience and no vision,” and has substituted vague slogans about peace for substantive action. “Looking at the present government I am scared,” he added ominously.

Sadik also discussed contradictions in the way Likud has dealt with the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). For example: the Israeli government repeatedly has asked the PNA to do something about Palestinians who steal Israeli cars and bring them to Palestinian-controlled areas of the West Bank and Gaza, theoretically beyond the grasp of Israeli authorities. On one occasion an Israeli Arab crashed through a PNA roadblock in a stolen Israeli vehicle into Tulkaram, a Palestinian-administered town on the West Bank. Palestinian security personnel fired on the vehicle, disabling it, and injured the Israeli Arab driver in the process. In response, the Israeli government imposed a 24-hour closure on Tulkaram as collective punishment for the PNA police wounding an Israeli citizen.

Sadik concluded his discussion by saying, “It is time to brainstorm for some alternatives to the current peace process.” He said that the current status of the peace process under the Likud government is not leading toward peace and that as long as the status quo is maintained, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza will become increasingly frustrated.

—Shawn L. Twing

Newly-Organized Women’s Group Holds First Conference in Washington

The extensive networks and strong personal relationships interwoven over the past few years just might bring about a just peace in the Middle East —in spite of attempts by Israel’s new Likud government to “drop a few stitches” in previously negotiated agreements with the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). That was the warp and the woof of the first day-long “Weaving Peace” conference of Women’s Organization Middle East Network (WOMEN) held in Washington, DC on Sept. 10 to bring together women leaders from all over the Arab world, Israel and the U.S.

The co-presidents of WOMEN are Miry Livnat and Leila N. Hakki, an Israeli and an Egyptian working for peace and development in the Middle East, especially for women. WOMEN’s Diplomatic Committee includes the wives of ambassadors to the U.S. of Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, the Palestinian Authority and Tunisia, while its honorary chairperson is Mrs. Leah Boutros-Ghali, wife of the U.N. secretary-general. Numerous U.S. senators and representatives co-hosted the event.

The focal point of the conference, presented at a black-tie opening reception, was a brilliantly displayed exhibit of embroidered Middle Eastern traditional dresses, weaving, ceramics, glassware, jewelry, metal and leather work. Displayed in the white marble-arched rotunda of the Russell Senate Building on Capitol Hill, the handicrafts were produced both by anonymous women artisans and by several internationally known artists from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine and Tunisia.

Many participants in the conference spoke of marketing these Middle East products and skills on a broader and more profitable scale—perhaps, making peace “chic” for haute couteur! Who knows, maybe Isaac Mizrahi’s spring line will include touches of Palestinian embroidery on the bodice, cuffs and hems!

Participants in the conference heard personal anecdotes about new friendships between Nancy Bakir, assistant secretary-general of Jordan’s Higher Council of Technology, and Haia Meshel, director of High-Tech Industries Association in Israel. Impressive statistics on women’s rights and progress in the Tunisian and Israeli work forces were related by Houda Kanoun, member of the Tunisian Chamber of Deputies, and Ceremia Padran, minister counselor for labor affairs in Israel. Intisar Al Wazir, PNA Minister of Social Affairs, spoke of the PNA’s full commitment to equal rights and material assistance to families of martyrs and prisoners, as well as to the disabled and hardship cases.

Tunisian women, said Kanoun, enjoy the right to legal abortions and paid maternity leave. Padran said that, while women make up about 50 percent of Israel’s work force, they have yet to enter the upper echelon of decision-making. Kanoun spoke of the need for women to bond together in South-South as well as North-South economic and cultural projects in order to progress. She observed that the strongest barriers to women’s progress are the “values and attitudes toward women —even women’s attitudes toward themselves.” She called for more access to technical and scientific training for women, especially in rural areas, and educating children to be both tolerant and open to all possibilities.

A more somber tone was set by the Palestinian speakers who repeatedly noted that until daily life on the ground improves, and until Israel halts its sieges, closures, land seizures and destruction of Palestinian property, there can be no peace. Dr. Ghania Malhis, the PNA’s assistant deputy minister for economy, cited disturbing statistics which showed how the Israeli economy has flourished since the Madrid peace conference in 1990, while the Palestinian economy has deteriorated.

Israel’s annual average GDP growth rate, she said, almost doubled, from 3.7 percent in the 1973-1989 period prior to the peace process to 6 percent in the 1990-1995 period. At the same time, the Palestinian GDP increased only 3.5 percent in 1995, which is less than the natural population increase, and plummeted by 24 percent in the first half of 1996, as the direct result of Israel’s siege and closure. More incredible for hard-pressed U.S. taxpayers, Israel’s GDP per capita increased from $10,950 in 1990 to $15,500 in 1995; while the Palestinian GDP per capita decreased from $1,200 in 1991 to less than $800 in the first half of 1996.

As some members of the audience became restive, Malhis went on to cite an increase in Israeli exports from $15.5 billion in 1990 to $28 billion in 1995, another direct benefit of the peace process which gave Israel greater access to international markets. Meanwhile, Palestinian exports, which never exceeded $400 million, dropped to less than $200 million in the first half of 1996, again due to Israel’s economic siege. While Israeli unemployment decreased from 10.5 percent in 1990 to 4.5 percent in 1995, Palestinian unemployment increased from an average of 18 percent during the Israeli occupation to 35 percent in the West Bank and 51 percent in Gaza in the first half of 1996.

In spite of the severe economic deterioration during the peace process, Malhis concluded, “the Palestinians still are willing to give peace another chance...To that effect, we call upon our Israeli partners to adhere to and fulfill their obligations and to refrain from material breaches of the agreements.” Similarly, Al Wazir opined that “we cannot focus our attention on the critical social and economic problems that Palestinians face every day unless the peace process moves on.”

While some participants, such as Yona Goldberg, national vice chairperson of the United Jewish Appeal and WOMEN board member, preferred to “leave politics to governments” and “find the common denominators” among Arab and Israeli women, Jewish peace activists such as Simona Sharoni, assistant professor of peace and conflict resolution at American University, and former Michigan state senator and WOMEN board member Lana Pollack both supported the introduction of constructive criticism as well as points of agreement in the dialog process. “If we concentrate only on points of agreement,” Pollack warned, “we women will not participate in the political and economic life of our countries.” The “token male” speaker, Egyptian Ambassador Maher El-Sayed, agreed, noting that the Palestinian problem is “the core” of the Middle East conflict.

Sarah Netanyahu, wife of the Israeli prime minister, on viewing the WOMEN exhibit on Sept. 9, declared, “We hope that this is a view of the future.” It just might be—if such networking continues until even the Likudniks are inextricably woven into the peace process.

Inspired by the Arafat-Rabin handshake, WOMEN was founded in 1994 to “foster peace in the Middle East by promoting cross-cultural exchange and assisting in the economic empowerment of women from the region.” WOMEN already has established contacts and projects in Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Morocco and Tunisia. WOMEN is headquartered at 2317 Ashboro Drive, Chevy Chase, MD 20815, tel. (301) 587-7234, fax (301) 608-2216.

—Deirdre L. Boyd

MEI Hosts Discussion on Iraq

American and Arab commentators discussed “The United States, Iraq and the Middle East” during a Sept. 9 briefing held at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC. Speaking at the event were Geoffrey Kemp, a former national security aid for President Reagan who currently is the director of regional studies programs at the Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom; Ahmed Hashim, a fellow in political-military and Middle East affairs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies; and Hisham Melhem, the Washington bureau chief of the Al Safir newspaper.

Hashim began the discussion by analyzing Iraq’s political and military strategies, and offered several possible reasons for Saddam Hussain’s decision to send his troops into Irbil in the U.N.-protected “safe haven” in northern Iraq. He argued that “Saddam’s reason for going into northern Iraq was almost exclusively for internal reasons,” and not an attempt to test U.S. resolve.

Kemp focused on U.S. policy toward Iraq and defended President Clinton’s decision to launch 44 cruise missiles against Iraq’s air defense network on Sept. 3 and 4. He said that “Clinton’s decision to use force was inevitable and essential,” and that it met three important criteria: it didn’t threaten Americans, it didn't harm Iraqi civilians, and it was acceptable to Saudi Arabia. Kemp also offered a pragmatic interpretation of the apparent lack of international support for the U.S. action from former Gulf war coalition members, describing the reports of the demise of that coalition are “wildly overblown.”

Hisham Melhem commented on the Arab perspective on the U.S.-Iraqi escalation and discussed an important duality in Arab perceptions of Iraq. On one hand, the Arab public does not support Saddam Hussain, but there is widespread sympathy for the Iraqi people, who are suffering from United Nations sanctions and U.S.-Iraqi tension. There also is, according to Melhem, a strong disdain in the Arab world for outside military intervention in the internal affairs of Arab states, which was a factor in Arab public opinion toward the U.S.-Iraqi military escalation. He added, however, that even Israel’s Operation “Grapes of Wrath” against Lebanon didn’t have a lasting negative affect on Arab public opinion toward the United States, so it is unlikely that the recent military attacks against Iraq will.

—Shawn L. Twing