Developments/Peace process review: November – December 1996

DEVELOPMENTS RELATED TO THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS

Issue 9   *   November – December 1996

Text of a statement by the Taba Ministerial Group

Cairo, 13 November 1996 (p. 1)

Text of the Cairo Declaration

14 November 1996 (p. 1)

Text of the Israeli-Jordanian Memorandum of Understanding on the improvement of the bilateral trade agreement

Dead Sea, Israel, 4 December 1996 (p. 3)

Text of a declaration by the European Council on the Middle East peace process

Dublin, 14 December 1996 (p. 4)

Text of a statement on the peace process by Israeli Foreign Minister Levy

Jerusalem, 30 December 1996 (p. 5)

The Middle East peace process: Chronology of meetings

(p. 8)

Notes (p. 12)

UNITED NATIONS

New York, January 1997

NOTE

Since April 1991, at the request of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights

of the Palestinian People, the Division for Palestinian Rights of the United Nations Secretariat

has prepared a compilation of statements, declarations, documents and other material

pertaining to the various aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the question of Palestine and the

Middle East peace process entitled "Approaches towards the settlement of the Arab-Israeli

conflict and the question of Palestine".

In January 1994, the bulletin was renamed "Developments related to the Middle East peace

process".  It includes information material related to the bilateral Arab-Israeli peace

negotiations, the multilateral negotiations on Middle East regional issues and other aspects of

the Middle East peace process.

This issue covers the months of November and December 1996.

Text of a statement by the Taba Ministerial Group

Cairo, 13 November 1996

On 13 November 1996, the following statement was issued in Cairo by the Taba Ministerial Group, composed of ministers from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and the United States:

The Taba Ministerial Group convened its third meeting during the Cairo Economic Conference on Wednesday, November 13, 1996.  The meeting was attended by the Ministers from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and the United States.  The Ministers reaffirmed their strong commitment to the peace process, and to the goals of economic cooperation and trade development.  The Ministers reviewed the progress of the Taba Working Groups to remove trade barriers and increase trade between their countries, as well as with the United States, specifically in the areas of trade promotion, standards and the Middle East Information Highway.  The participants stressed the crucial importance of the development of the Palestinian economy.  They noted with concern that the already weak Palestinian economy is suffering from restrictions and closures which hinder the daily movement of Palestinian labour and trade.  They recognized the need of all parties in the region to live in peace and security, the improvement of which will enhance the economic viability of the region as a whole.  They reiterated that removing restrictive measures will prevent the decline and contribute positively to the performance of the Palestinian economy, as well as the political atmosphere surrounding the peace process as a whole.  The Ministers decided to suggest a course of action to be implemented to remove trade barriers and to improve the Palestinian business environment.  This course of action is based on the Market Access Study of June 1995.  The structure of this course of action should be completed by March 1997.  During the Ministerial meeting, a demonstration took place of the Middle East Information Highway (the MENA Peace Net), which includes trade opportunities, means to locate consultants, vendors, and manufacturers, and country profiles, as well as a "how to do business" guide.  The Ministers endorsed the agenda for 1997 for the Taba Group to continue implementation of the action items included in  the  Market  Access Study approved by the Ministers during their second meeting held in Amman in October 1995.1/

Text of the Cairo Declaration

14 November 1996

On 14 November 1996, the following declaration was adopted at the conclusion of the third Middle East and North Africa Economic Conference, held in Cairo:

  On November 12-14, 1996, the Middle East and North Africa Economic Conference was held in Cairo, Egypt, under the presidency of His Excellency Hosni Mubarak.  The Conference, co-sponsored by the United States and the Russian Federation, with the support of Canada, the European Union and Japan, brought together senior government and private-sector leaders from the Middle East and North Africa, as well as from other parts of the world.

Conference participants thank President Mubarak and the Government of Egypt for hosting this event, and for the excellent organization and generous hospitality provided.  The participants expressed their appreciation for Egypt's leadership in the quest for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Participants of the Cairo Economic Conference expressed their unwavering commitment to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East, on the basis of the terms of reference of the Madrid Peace Conference, established by UN Security Council resolutions 242 [(1967)] and 338 [(1973)].  In this vein, they reaffirmed their determination to build upon the agreements reached among the parties and underlined the utmost importance of the faithful and expeditious implementation of those agreements by all parties, in particular on the Israeli-Palestinian track.  They further recommitted themselves to broadening and deepening peace and achieving further progress on all outstanding issues on all the Arab-Israeli negotiating tracks of the peace process.  They urged all parties to pursue measures and policies which would help build confidence between the peoples of the region.

The theme for the Cairo Economic Conference was: "Building for the Future, Creating an Investor-Friendly Environment".  The Conference provided an opportunity to encourage international and regional investment in the Middle East and North Africa.  The region's economic, commercial and trade potential was highlighted, which is being greatly enhanced by important economic reform programmes currently being undertaken by many States in the region.  These reforms, which include privatization, structural reform and removing trade barriers, have provided for a more business-friendly economic climate throughout the region.

International private-sector representatives were given the opportunity to investigate in detail the increased economic and commercial opportunities in the region.  Individual countries presented their investment and development programmes, and cross-border opportunities were highlighted as well.  Constructive and fruitful discussions were held on topics of particular relevance to both the countries of the region and the international business community.

The participants stressed the crucial importance of the development of the Palestinian economy.  They noted with concern that the already weak Palestinian economy is suffering from restrictions and closures, which hinder the daily movement of Palestinian labour and trade.  They recognized the need for all parties in the region to live in peace, prosperity and security, the improvement of which will enhance the economic viability of the region as a whole.  They reiterated that removing restrictive measures and closures will prevent the decline of, and contribute positively to the performance of the Palestinian economy, as well as the political atmosphere surrounding the peace process in its entirety.

The status of the economic institutions called for by the MENA conferences previously held at Casablanca and Amman was reviewed during the conference.  The significant progress made on establishing the Middle East-Mediterranean Travel and Tourism Association in Tunis was welcomed by the participants.  They underscored the importance of the Bank for Economic Cooperation and Development in the Middle East and North Africa in Cairo and its potential contribution to the promotion of capital flow to the region, to building infrastructure projects and to the development of the private sector in the region.  The conclusion of the drafting of the Agreement establishing the Bank was welcomed.  Countries were encouraged to sign the Agreement and complete their funding and ratification procedures promptly in order to enable the Bank to begin operations in 1997.  Work on establishing a Regional Business Council was also reviewed, and the relevant parties recommitted themselves to moving this important initiative forward.

The Executive Secretariat of the MENA Conferences in Rabat has continued to develop successfully its programmes and activities in fostering public/private partnership in the region between conferences.

The activities of the REDWG [Regional Economic Development Working Group] Monitoring Committee Secretariat established in Amman pursuant to the Amman Declaration, and formally inaugurated and institutionalized in May 1996, were reviewed.  The activities of REDWG and the work of its Monitoring Committee in areas covered by the Copenhagen Action Plan, i.e. infrastructure, tourism, trade and finance, were also reviewed.  Participants expressed their appreciation for the work done by the Committee.

Government and private-sector participants at the conference reaffirmed their commitment to continue to work as partners for peace and prosperity in the Middle East and North Africa.  They underscored the importance of the economic underpinnings of peace.  Nevertheless, they reaffirmed the urgency of achieving concrete progress in the political dimension of the Middle East peace process.

The participants expressed their appreciation for the unique role played by the World Economic Forum, whose tireless efforts were critical to the success of the conference.  They also expressed their gratitude to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, for its important contribution to a number of Conference sessions.

The participants decided to meet again in late 1997 in Doha, Qatar, for the fourth Middle East/North Africa Economic Conference.2/

Text of the Israeli-Jordanian Memorandum of Understanding on the improvement of the bilateral trade agreement

Dead Sea, Israel, 4 December 1996

 On 4 December 1996, at the Dead Sea Radisson-Moriah Hotel, the Minister of Trade and Industry of Israel, Natan Sharansky, and his Jordanian counterpart, Ali Abu Ragheb, signed a Memorandum of Understanding designed to improve the Israeli-Jordanian Trade Agreement signed on 24 April 1996. The following is the text of  the memorandum:

1. Wishing to further the development of trade and economic relations between the two countries, the Ministers of Industry and Trade of both countries met to explore ways and means to promote trade and cooperation between the business communities of their countries.

2. The Ministers of Industry and Trade of Jordan and Israel have reached an understanding on the expansion of trade concessions on goods exported from Jordan.  Both ministers expressed confidence that this understanding, coupled with new transportation arrangements, will extend the benefits of peace between the two countries and pave the way for [the] mutual liberalization of bilateral trade.

3. The Ministers of Industry and Trade of Israel and Jordan welcome the new transportation arrangements that will enable the delivery of Jordanian goods to Israel and from Israel to Jordan – through the "door-to-door" transport system.

4. Israel and Jordan attach great importance to facilitating the passage of goods between Jordan and the Palestinian Authority.  An early meeting of experts of Jordan and Israel will be convened to discuss transport arrangements under the provisions of the Jordan-Israel Transportation Agreement applicable to trade between Jordan and the PA, to supplement those already reached on cement and fuel.

Upon the conclusion of these discussions, a forum composed of Israel, Jordan, and PA experts will discuss the implementation of appropriate trade arrangements, taking into consideration the framework of the existing agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.

5. The Ministers of Industry and Trade of Israel and Jordan appreciate that a properly prepared trilateral meeting among Israel, Jordan and the PA representatives would contribute to the alleviation of the difficulties in trade between Jordan and the PA and would be a sensible way to discuss pending trade issues among the three parties.

6. Israel and Jordan have agreed to join efforts vis-à-vis their international trading partners in order to obtain recognition of their cumulative origin. This would facilitate trade and encourage the establishment of joint Israeli and Jordanian projects.

7. The Ministers of Jordan and Israel have agreed to cooperate in the promotion of joint ventures between Jordanians and Israeli partners.

8. Both ministers expressed their satisfaction with the first round of grants awarded under the new programme of TRIDE established by the Governments of Jordan, Israel and the United States for the encouragement of cooperation among private companies of the three countries.3/

Text of declaration by the European Council on the Middle East peace process

Dublin, 14 December 1996

The following declaration was adopted by the European Council at the conclusion of its meeting held in Dublin, on 13 and 14 December:

Declaration by the European Council on the Middle East peace process

1. The European Council expresses support for the Special Envoy to the Middle East peace process and welcomes the declared willingness of all parties to cooperate with him.  It calls on all parties to recognize his appointment as a further demonstration of the Union's commitment to promoting peace in the Middle East.

2. Recalling its Declaration at Florence on 21 June and the Council's Declaration at Luxembourg on 1 October, it reaffirms its support for the fundamental principles of a just and lasting settlement in the Middle East, notably land for peace and self-determination for the Palestinians, with all that this implies.

3. The European Council is gravely concerned by the continuing deterioration in the peace process.  It calls on all parties actively to discourage violence and work for a reduction of tension so that negotiations can resume on all tracks in accordance with the principles of Madrid and the terms of the Declaration of Principles.

4. The European Council calls for an early resolution of the deadlock over Hebron, implementation of the other outstanding elements of the Interim Agreements and the early resumption of the permanent status negotiations.

5. The settlements issue is eroding confidence in the peace process.  Settlements contravene international law and are a major obstacle to peace.

6. Palestinian social and economic development require the immediate lifting of the blockade.  The European Council urges the Israeli authorities to remove all restrictions except where Israel's legitimate security interests are manifestly engaged, as in the case of acts of terrorism.  The dire economic consequences – with their effect of breeding discontent and violence – have dissipated the optimism generated by the establishment of Palestinian self-rule.  The Council has instructed the Special Envoy to promote concrete and immediate measures to address these issues.

7. The European Council urges the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority to cooperate at all levels in the interests of security and to take all necessary measures to control extremists and combat terrorism.

8. In the spirit of the Barcelona process, the European Council calls on all Mediterranean partners, which are concluding Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements, to join with the Union in a common effort to advance the development and integration of the Palestinian economy within the region.  The European Council recalls that both the Association Agreement with the Palestinian Authority and the similar Agreement with Israel commit the parties to promote compliance with the basic norms of democracy, including respect for human rights and the rule of law.4/

Text of a statement on the peace process by Israeli Foreign Minister Levy

Jerusalem, 30 December 1996

On 30 December 1996, speaking before the Knesset, Foreign Minister of Israel David Levy explained his Government’s position with respect to the Middle East peace process agreements.  The following is the text of his address:

The new Government of Israel will continue with the peace process and will honour agreements which its predecessor signed.

The redeployment in Hebron is part of those agreements.

It is very likely that there were some in this House who thought or hoped that words were one thing, and actions another.  A responsible Government which notifies Parliament of its basic guidelines undertakes to act according to that notification.

This is elementary responsibility in the procedures of a country's ruling Administration, and in the responsibility a Government takes upon itself in the affairs of the State.  Accordingly we are proceeding along this path, a difficult path.

The affairs of the State require us to act according to the Government's basic guidelines, in accordance with the statement the Prime Minister made to the Knesset, and we are acting thus.

I have said that it is a difficult path: there will be ups and downs.  The other side harbours dreams and aspirations in its heart.  We carry with us the injunction in this campaign for peace and implementing these agreements, both in what the agreement requires and in what we are obligated to maintain and perform for the preservation of Israel's vital interests, including the existence of the Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza District, and the unity and continued unification and existence of Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish People and the capital of the State of Israel.

We are acting according to these principles, while standing firm on security, on the obligation of the other side to carry out its part reciprocally, in order to prevent a danger that would threaten or harm Israelis and threaten the entire peace process.

Mr. Speaker, I have heard such descriptions in these days that someone not living here might imagine a situation in which time stopped still and we are back in 1929.  All of us bear in our hearts that wound of the events in Hebron.

But that is not the situation today!  We are not impotent nor lacking in defence.  We are sovereign and masters of our security.  There are the Israel Defence Forces.  And the security systems are in charge of security.  Accordingly, I do not accept this comparison in any way or manner.  It is impossible to wipe out our memories, but it is not possible to live as though we are helpless and impotent.

Are we leaving Hebron?  Are we abandoning Jews?  Fleeing?  Fearing?  Absolutely not!

We are carrying out the agreement. And I want to say this with my hand on my heart.  Perhaps someone will explain to me: could it be otherwise without this agreement and implementing the full autonomy we have previously undertaken, with a strong police force?

Now it may be that from your point of view, Knesset Member Ze'evi, there is altogether no need to go into any process, nor autonomy, nor anything.  To stand frozen, on guard with our weapons, not to search for any way – and to say "We stand here, without us nothing will move, and we shall not do anything, and our situation will be good!"

…

I would have liked to have been a partner to such a wish.

But reality is not like this; nothing can stay static unless we have decided to altogether abandon the hope for peace.

I have asked myself: since the situation is thus, and the Government must act, a Government by virtue of its responsibility must adopt decisions.  It cannot say: "I am not part of what is happening. I do not need security. I do not need to carry out anything.  'A people that shall dwell on its own and disregard the Gentiles'."  But a Government cannot act according to this conception.  Its responsibility impels it to carry out agreements while insisting on the important main points in it, the national and security aspects.

Let us surmise a scenario: that we did not proceed to honour agreements, abandoned the peace process, marked time and waited to see what would happen. Would the situation then have been better from a security standpoint?  I think not, and I think I have some knowledge.  I do not have your experience, but I have experience in Israeli Governments, and I know about matters.

Would the security situation then have been better? Anyone who deals with these issues at this time, will tell you: No!  The situation could have been much graver.  Non-implementation of agreements, no progress, standing ready with our weapons, alone, in a bloodbath, and then to sit and search for a way how to get out of this situation: I am not a gambler and not ready, as long as I am in the Government, to take such a total gamble.

I know what could happen and the danger of such a total gamble; it is very likely that this course would have been imposed on us.  We are working, and considering, and we must prevent such a situation.

Mr. Speaker, let us suppose we were not carrying out [our obligations] and the situation in Hebron would continue without our doing anything, without advancing, without honouring the agreement.  Would the situation of the Jews in Hebron be better?  I have a very big, an immense, question mark regarding this, regarding their safety.

We know what would have happened had the Palestinian population of 120,000, waiting for, and believing in, the implementation of the agreement, reached the conclusion that Israel was not intending to carry out the agreement.

You are an experienced man: you know what would have happened.  True, they would not have been able to overcome us, that's true.  They could not defeat our army, that's true.  We would have taken measures, but measures that would have left not only deep wounds which would have wiped out any prospect of peace tomorrow, but horrifying pictures in the whole world; the justice of our cause would have been wiped out in the face of those photographs; would that then have been better?  These are the questions the Government pondered – and it was not easy.

I know what members of the Government and those sitting on these benches in this House are feeling.  I know.  But there is one factor which must be decided by us and is being awaited: that is to render an accounting.  This is a Government, it cannot say: "I'm not here."  It cannot say: “I have a wish and therefore neither agreements nor the situation interest me”.  It must give answers: answers to its people; answers to the public; answers for the sake of answering, saying towards what it is striving, where it intends to lead this ship of state.

It cannot say the ship will sail on by itself, because there is no Government.  A Government must take decisions and it faces obligations and commitments.  It cannot dither.

I do not love Hebron less than you do; nor more than you.  The veteran members of this House know I built everything that was built in Hebron and with faith and priority rehabilitated the plan I presented to the Government, a plan named for me, for building in Hebron. I am not abandoning Hebron – nor am I abandoning the Israelis in Hebron, nor the sites built and renovated in Hebron, nor our citizens in Hebron.  And the Israel Defence Forces are there and will be there, and their safety is in the army's hands.

If this Government neglects the security of Jews – I repeat – we are not talking about the state budget, about something prosaic; if anyone thinks the Government of which he is a member is endangering the lives of Jews, it is forbidden for him to stay in the Government for even a day.  He should work to overthrow it.  That is what I believe.

I do not believe this is so; I believe we are in control of things, of the safety of Israelis, of the buildings, of the holy sites in our hands.  There is the authority of the Defence Forces.  Must we be blinded by light, blame ourselves, think of an impossible mission?

What would I do with the 120,000, or the 130,000, or the 150,000 – what would I do?  I bear the responsibility.  Should we convert them to Judaism?  Annex them?  Crush them?  Is that desirable?  Is it possible?  I ask myself also: Is it human?  No!

And since the situation is like this, we are guiding events in such a way that in a certain area Jews can live in safety and the Arabs can conduct their Palestinian affairs.

Mr. Speaker, this Government, in spite of all the difficulties, – and it is being attacked from the Right and the Left – is determined to proceed on the path where all prospects are being examined.  There is no guarantee.  No one knows what the morrow will bring.  There are things the Palestinian Authority must carry out, and we are talking of its ability to do so.  We expect to see the proof of important cooperation.  It must not be sneered at.  Sometimes it is even essential to need it; we must demand of them to stay loyal to their commitments.

For our part, out of the same realization of existence, what is said from this forum by the Prime Minister, we shall continue along this path.  Would that no landmines will lie on the way and we can eliminate the dangers and return to the belief that this decision will advance the people of Israel while maintaining our vital national interests and security, and we shall be able to proclaim the good news of peace.

I cannot engage in prophecy: it is possible to articulate policy.  It is possible to explain wishes, to point out the dangers.  That is what a Government in Israel is elected to do.5/

The Middle East peace process: Chronology of meetings

*   *   *

Notes

1. USIA, via the Internet at gopher://198.80.36.82/OR47985196-47988373-range/archives/1996/pdq.96.

2. Ibid. at gopher://198.80.36.82/11s/current/news/geog/nea.

3. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel, via the Internet at gopher://israel-info.gov.il/OR191803-197626-/new/pprocess1.

4. Via the Internet from EUROPA, the European Union’s WWW server at http://europa.eu.int/en/record/otherdoc.html.

5. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel, via the Internet at gopher://israel-info.gov.il/OR207279-217246-/new/leaders1.

6. Based on the release of the United States Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, 8 November 1996, via the Internet at http://www.state.gov/www/regions/nea/fs_meetings_mepp.html.