James J. Zogby: What investment and freedom would have meant for Gaza

 "Yasser Arafat, speaking of Gaza’s future, would say that with investment and freedom from occupation it could become Singapore; if denied both, it could become Somalia. Israel did everything it could to guarantee that Gaza would become Somalia—and they appear to have succeeded."

James J. Zogby- president of the Washington-based Arab American Institute, "

What investment and freedom would have meant for Gaza

Mar 18,2025 - Last updated at Mar 18,2025

When I first heard President Donald Trump’s “Gaza Riviera” scheme, it brought back memories of Palestinian hopes three decades ago during the heyday of the Oslo Accords. Back then, I was serving as co-chair of “Builders for Peace,” a project launched by Vice President Al Gore to encourage American businesses to invest in the Palestinian economy to support the fledgling peace process.

My fellow co-chair, Mel Levine, and I led a number of delegations of American business leaders (including Arab Americans and American Jews) to the Palestinian lands. Our first exposure to the problems we would encounter came as we attempted to enter via the Allenby Bridge from Jordan. American Jews and others passed easily, while Arab Americans were separated from the group and forced to undergo humiliating screening.

We convened a session in Jerusalem for Palestinians to meet with Americans interested in investment opportunities, but to enter the city Palestinians had to secure a pass from the occupation authority. The passes only permitted them a few hours in the city, limiting the time they could devote to our discussions.

Entry into and exit from Gaza was equally problematic. One deeply disturbing scene on leaving Gaza has stayed with me. Hundreds of Palestinian men filled what I can only describe as cattle chutes, waiting in the sun for permission to enter into Israel. Straddling these chutes were young Israeli soldiers shouting at the Palestinians below to look down and hold their passes above their heads.

Our meetings with Palestinian business leaders in Gaza and the West Bank were hopeful. They were eager to discuss possibilities with their American counterparts, and the Americans were impressed. A number of partnerships were discussed.

Two projects were notable: one to manufacture leather products, another to assemble furniture. Both sought to take advantage of Gaza’s proximity to Eastern Europe for export. As both projects required that Israel permit import of raw material and export of finished products, both failed. It appeared that Israel might have been willing to entertain such projects, but only if they operated through an Israeli middleman, thereby reducing the ventures’ profitability.... READ MORE   https://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/james-j-zogby/what-investment-and-freedom-would-have-meant-gaza

   [AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES (or watch videos) IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine ]

ATFP News & Commentary Roundup

[AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine]

http://jordantimes.com/current-peace-efforts-should-not-fail

Current peace efforts should not fail

by Ahmad Y. Majdoubeh | Feb 06, 2014

The present round of negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis, seen as perhaps the last chance to rescue the two-state solution and achieve durable peace, should not be allowed to fail.

For one thing, peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis is long overdue. It is time they put the conflict behind them and lived and let live.

For another, further prolonging the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not in the two sides’ interest. In the aftermath of the Arab Spring the whole region is sinking into chaos. There is no saying, if the peace talks fail, that Israelis and Palestinians will not be dragged into the chaos.

While much of what we read and hear in the media about the fate of the current round of peace talks is somewhat discouraging, there is a window of opportunity which should be seized.

The American administration, represented by the charismatic US Secretary of State John Kerry, is both deeply engaged in the process and exerting tremendous efforts and pressure to bring about a resolution, or at least an agreement on a framework for final status talks.

This US’ involvement is not to be underestimated. Without it, as the parties to the conflict themselves know well, no agreement is possible.

A few months ago, several reports came out that America was shifting its attention away from the region, to Southeast Asia. Many felt this would not bode well for the region and for Mideast peace, and were calling on America to reconsider.

Since America has not abandoned the Middle East and is, in fact, deeply committed, all concerned should capitalise on this historic moment. Such an opportunity and commitment do not come about often.

The attention Kerry is giving to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is almost unprecedented. It is reminiscent of that given in the late 1970s by president Jimmy Carter, which resulted in peace with Egypt.

Peace with Jordan and the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians were also brought about by George Bush Sr’s deep involvement in peacemaking and the Clinton administration.

However, many Palestinians, Jordanians and Arabs are nervous. They feel that more pressure is placed on the Palestinians than on the Israelis. They are afraid, in particular, that the Palestinian right of return might be compromised, that the Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories might not be dealt with satisfactorily, that the very existence of Arab Israelis might be threatened by Israel’s insistence on recognition of its “Jewishness”.

One hopes that such fears are baseless, and are due to the lack of information as to what is really going on behind closed doors in the negotiations.

The Obama administration and its team of mediators know both the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the facts on the ground extremely well. 

They know what should be done, therefore, to bring about real peace, like the one made between Israel and Egypt in the late 1970s, in which Israel withdrew from all occupied Egyptian territories.

And they know that the last thing the region wants is another problematic Oslo that would open a new can of worms and promote conflict rather than solve it.

Israel is the occupier and the Palestinians are occupied.

The creation of Israel and its resort to militarism since then are the causes of the Palestinian tragedy and diaspora.

There are very many UN resolutions pertaining to Palestinians’ rights (including the right of return) that Israel simply disregards.

The illegal Israeli settlements are built on usurped, occupied, Palestinian land. Insistence on the Jewishness of Israel is a procrastinating, subversive tactic.

These and other things the Americans and the Israelis know. And they know that one cannot victimise the victim further, and that if there is to be real peace, Israel must be held accountable and hand over to the Palestinians what is rightfully theirs, unconditionally.

Israelis have their state, and they can call it whatever they like. Palestinians need their own state. Israel and America must work actively on giving it to them. In return, Israel will enjoy true security, stability and peace.

If the current American-led peace initiative succeeds, it could be the “tipping point” for stability, peace and prosperity in the entire region.

For these and many other reasons, current peace efforts should not fail.

On the ‘Jewish State of Israel’

by John V. Whitbeck | Dec 29, 2013

[AS ALWAYS PLEASE GO TO THE LINK TO READ GOOD ARTICLES IN FULL: HELP SHAPE ALGORITHMS (and conversations) THAT EMPOWER DECENCY, DIGNITY, JUSTICE & PEACE... and hopefully Palestine] 

http://jordantimes.com/on-the-jewish-state-of-israel

News reports continue to suggest that one of the primary roadblocks to any agreement in the current round of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations is the understandable Palestinian refusal to accept the Israeli demand that Palestine explicitly recognise Israel as a, or the, “Jewish State” — a legally and intellectually bizarre demand clearly intended to make any agreement impossible.

Palestinian acceptance of this Israeli demand would constitute explicit Palestinian acquiescence in permanent second-class status for Palestinian citizens of Israel and in the liquidation of the rights of millions of Palestinian refugees, as well as implicit Palestinian acceptance that the ethnic cleansing of Palestine was morally justified, which in turn would require conceding that Palestinians are sub-humans not entitled to fundamental human rights.

No Palestinian leader could accept this demand and survive. Israelis know that. That is why the demand is being made.

While few anticipate that the current round of negotiations (which, according to Israeli press reports, Benjamin Netanyahu now wants to extend for a further year beyond their end of April deadline, so as to kill more time while building more settlements) will produce anything, the state of Palestine could and should take constructive action now to disarm the “Jewish State” gambit, which the Israeli prime minister appears to view as his best hope for shifting blame, at least in Western eyes, to the Palestinians.

The State of Palestine could and should reiterate that Israel’s self-identification is a matter for Israelis (not Palestinians) to decide and then publicly announce that should Israel choose to change its official name from “State of Israel” to “Jewish State of Israel”, the State of Palestine, while preferring democracy as a matter of principle and hoping that Israel will, in the future, become a fully democratic state, according equal rights, without any discrimination based on race or religion, to all its citizens, would persist in its efforts to end the Israeli occupation and would enter into any agreements which might subsequently be reached with the relabelled Israeli state.

Subject only to one exception noted below, all states are free to determine and embellish their “official names” as they please.

There are four official “Islamic Republics”, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Some official names are eccentric, such as the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (so named because the country is located on the eastern side of the Uruguay River) and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (so named, relatively recently, because Simon Bolivar was Hugo Chavez’s personal hero).

Some official names are counterintuitive to the point of absurdity, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea ... or, potentially, the “Jewish and Democratic State of Israel”.

In one case, a state’s official name has been imposed by the United Nations as a condition for UN membership and is rejected and not used by the state itself — the “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, which prefers to call itself the “Republic of Macedonia” but whose right to use the name “Macedonia” is disputed by Greece.

By choice, the Republic of Moldova and the State of Palestine are listed in the UN’s alphabetical listings among the Rs and Ss, respectively, while the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is, involuntarily, listed among the Fs.

If a relabelled “Jewish State of Israel” wished to emphasise its Jewish character by being listed among the Js (as the State of Palestine has emphasised its state status by being listed among the Ss), its wish would presumably be granted.

If formalising the status of Israel as a “Jewish State” were a genuine concern of the Israeli government or a deeply felt need of the Israeli people, and not simply a cynical gambit to achieve and excuse failure in negotiations, and if the Israeli government wishes to proclaim this status officially to the world, the road is open and nothing is stopping Israel from achieving this on its own.

However, Israel’s preferred self-identification and official name are not matters in which the State of Palestine has any role to play.

If the Israeli government does not dare to proclaim its state officially “Jewish” (and accept the concomitant risks of doing so), how can it demand that those whose country has been conquered and colonised, and whose people have been dispossessed and dispersed, make the State of Israel possible on its behalf?

Whether or not the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah has any hope (or fear) that the current round of negotiations will produce anything, it should make the artificiality of the Israeli government’s demand and the reasonableness of the Palestinian refusal to accept it emphatically clear, in terms that the international community, and particularly Western governments and peoples, can understand.

The writer is an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel. He contributed this article to The Jordan Times.

11 million Palestinians scattered around world

Palestinians who fled violence in the refugee camp of Yarmouk are seen at the Masnaa Lebanese border crossing with Syria as people stamp their documents before entering Lebanon on Wednesday (AFP photo)

http://jordantimes.com/11-million-palestinians-scattered-around-world

RAMALLAH — There are some 11 million Palestinians scattered around the world, including more than five million refugees living throughout the Middle East.

Their plight has made headlines in Syria, where the UN agency for Palestinian refugees UNRWA says as many as 100,000 Palestinians may have fled the Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus in recent days because of fighting.

Thousands returned to the camp on Thursday despite sporadic gunfire.

On Wednesday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas urged the international community to help those refugees fleeing fighting in camps in Syria to enter the West Bank and Gaza.

The fate of Palestinian refugees and their descendants is one of the most sensitive issues in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

It remains an emotive issue for Palestinians more than 60 years after many first fled during what they call the “Nakba” or “catastrophe” of their exodus during the fighting that followed Israel’s creation in 1948 on Palestinian land.

Around 760,000 fled or were forced from their homes during that time, followed by several hundreds of thousands more who left during the 1967 war in which Israel captured East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics earlier this year put the Palestinian population living in the Palestinian territories at 4.29 million, with 2.65 million in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and 1.64 million in Gaza.

Another 1.4 million Palestinians live in Israel and are often referred to as Arab Israelis. They have citizenship and now make up 20 per cent of Israel’s population.

Hundreds of thousands live in countries throughout the world, with large communities in the United States and several countries of Latin America.

According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), there are another five million Palestinian refugees and their descendants in the Middle East.

The number includes 850,000 in the West Bank, 1.2 million in Gaza, two million in Jordan, 525,000 in Syria and 450,000 in Lebanon.

Their living conditions and rights differ vastly from place to place, with Jordan the only Arab country to grant the population nationality.

In Lebanon, many professions are off-limits to Palestinians, who live in difficult conditions in refugee camps. Their situation in Syria had been comparatively comfortable, before the outbreak of violence in the country.

Palestinians are also present throughout much of the Gulf, where they began moving in the 1960s lured by the opportunity of employment.

The right of return for Palestinian refugees remains a key issue in peace negotiations with Israel.

UN General Assembly Resolution 194, adopted on December 11, 1948, stipulates that “the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date”.

It says that compensation should be paid for the property of those who do not want to return.

The Palestinians — backed by the Arab world — want Israel to recognise the principle of the right of return, with a detailed solution to be negotiated subsequently.

But Israel fears that this would open the door for a massive influx that could chance its character as a Jewish state.