• Middle East International magazine • Foreign Policy in Focus • Partners for Peace • Special Report: War and Peace in the Mideast • Talk: World News message boards • Live Online Transcripts • Subscribe to washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters • mywashingtonpost. com -- customized news, traffic, weather and more

Conflict in the Mideast
With Michael Brown
Foreign Policy in Focus
Thursday, June 6, 2002; 12:30 EDT

In a response to a suicide car bombing that blew up a bus in Israel and killed 17 people, Israel has again stormed the headquarters compound of Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat. Several members of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s government have called for Arafat to be exiled or killed. Israelis Strike Arafat's Offices, (Post, June 6)

What is next in the cycle of violence in the Mideast between Israel and the Palestinians? Does U.S. foreign policy play a role in mediating?

Michael Brown, executive director of Partners for Peace and contributor to Middle East International magazine, was online Thursday, June 6 at 12:30 p.m. EDT, to discuss the latest news and take questions and comments.

Brown is the executive director of Partners for Peace, an organization that focuses on the detention without charges and torture of American citizens in Israel. The organization also runs an annual "Jerusalem Women Speak: Three Women, Three Faiths, One Shared City" tour that brings a Palestinian Christian woman, Palestinian Muslim woman, and Israeli Jewish woman to the U.S. to talk about their hopes for a just peace between Palestinians and Israelis.

He also writes twice per month from Washington for Middle East International magazine, a respected source for news, analysis, and commentary on the Middle East since 1971. He is also a Middle East analyst for Foreign Policy In Focus, a joint project of the Institute for Policy Studies and the Interhemispheric Resource Center.

Brown has lived and worked for several assignments in the Gaza Strip since 1993.

The transcript follows below.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

Michael Brown: First of all, a word about Israel's overnight invasion of Ramallah. The suicide bombings are horrid. Period. There must be limits to the pursuit of a just cause. Yet Israel will get nowhere positive by continuing its occupation and incursions. The Israelis will say they must not appease terror, but ratcheting up the violence from their side will just make the situation worse. At the end of the day, they simply must comply with international law and get out. They cannot continue the subjugation of the Palestinian people for another 35 years. Palestinians will rightly revolt. Suicide bombings are unacceptable in my opinion but legally they clearly have a right to resist military occupation. The Israeli notion that there is a violent answer to this is leading to more and more horror for both peoples.

Warren, Mich.: How can the Palistinian people put up with the living conditions in the camps and why do they not seek a leader who can deliver peace for them?

Michael Brown: The living conditions in the Palestinian refugee camps are tough. I was in Khan Yunis camp in December of 2000 when the Israeli military came in and demolished homes on the outskirts. It was terrifying. The IDF was firing from two different positions directly into the camp in the middle of the night. We hit the ground and moved low for cover. I saw Palestinian families with small children fleeing in the dead of night. I was close to scared out of my mind yet the people around me, presumably scared initially, were now having this become part of their reality. This reality will lead nowhere good when the Palestinian kids there grow up. Their only experience in the Gaza camps with Israelis is through the sights of an Israeli gunner. Fortunately, in the West Bank there are groups such as Rabbis for Human Rights that give Palestinians a different perspective of Israelis -- as people who are not just attacking their neighborhoods but working to prevent home demolitions.

Palestinians in Gaza would talk a lot about the problems with Arafat. And I mean a lot and freely. Yet Arafat gained support with the Israelis pinned him down in his compound. Like it or not, he's the Palestinian leader and Sharon can't choose his partner.

Alexandria, Va.: Why didn't Arafat accept President Clinton's peace plan last year?

Is it because Clinton proposed implementing a Palestinian "right of return" only OUTSIDE of the state of Israel?

Did Arafat demand the right to move Palestinians to areas inside of Israel's pre-1967 borders?

Michael Brown: Arafat rejected the outcome at Camp David in July of 2000 because it would have relegated the Palestinians to non-contiguous bantustans. Palestinians may have controlled the rooms but would not have controlled the passages. Apartheid's bantustans weren't accepted in S. Africa and so Arafat was right to reject them here. Progress was made at Taba several months later. Significant progress and Barak improved his offer. Even the Morris and Barak interview in the NY Review of Books for June 13 says that Arafat made a proposal there at Taba. The myth has always been that Arafat was accepting offers but not making them. Well, apparently at Taba he did. And in any event, the Palestinian position is clear: Comply with international law and get out of the occupied territories.

Arafat was working to get Palestinians into Israel as they have homes there that Israeli Jews are now living in. That's a reasonable position to put forward. People have a right to return to their homes. Arafat indicated flexibility on the issue so it's probably not going to be a full right of return. A statement of Israeli wrongdoing in forcing Palestinians out in 1948 is also needed.

Arlington, Va.: What do you make of efforts in the media to pick a successor to Arafat, particularly Mohammed Dalian of Gaza? Are they setting him as the next martyr?

Michael Brown: Efforts to pick Arafat's successor are misguided. The Palestinians do need to more clearly specify that but nobody is going to step in and sign away the house just because the Israelis want them to. Palestinian leaders of all political backgrounds will reject collaboration with Israel. If Arafat goes tomorrow, the problem of the occupation will remain.

Elections are needed. They have not been held since 1996. Palestinians on the ground want them. They reject Arafat's corruption. But what has become clear in recent months is that no matter what problems they have with Arafat they have greater problems with the Israeli occupation.

I have serious reservations about the US being too closely aligned with Dahlan or Rajoub (though his standing is falling). If we're serious about reform then we should work for pulling the Israeli troops back so that they can have real elections. And we should back a real legal system for the Palestinians rather than star chambers or kangaroo courts were Palestinians try other Palestinians without proper legal protections because Sharon wants it and our government wants it. Palestinians are keenly aware of American hypocrisy and when we don't adhere to our principles they see it and comment on it. They saw it with Gore several years ago when he praised the establishment of the State Security courts.

Silver Spring: Well, we certainly know where you speak from. But your solution is for the Israelis to get out of exactly what? The West Bank and Gaza? What about the Golan? What about Jerusalem? what about anything west of the Jordan River? For indeed this is what the Palestinians want and will not stop until they get. You are deluded to think otherwise. Your simplistic approach smacks of Neville Chamberlin -- and like appeasement with the Nazis, appeasement with the Palestinians won't work.

Michael Brown: Complying with international law is not appeasement. The Israelis should be content with 78 percent of historic Palestine. What an enormous concession for the Palestinians to make up front. Now it's time for the Israelis not to make concessions but to comply with international law.

Additionally, the Israelis have simply made matters worse by doubling the number of settlers in the years since Oslo. How can any Palestinian think the Israelis are serious about peace when they see the land being taken out from underneath them. And Barak was no exception on this.

Avon, Conn.: UN Resolution 242 states 'return of territories,' not ...'all the territories' The authors of the resolution purpoosely left out the definite article, because they knew that return of 'all the territories' was not possible or feasible . Any comment?

Michael Brown: The prelude clearly states words to the effect that it is inadmissible to take territory by force of arms.

Israel would be better off to establish a just outcome for the Palestinians. Claiming more and more of the West Bank and forcing Palestinians to live in disconnected ghettoes will not create a better day for Palestinians or Israelis. The UN established Israel on 57 percent of the land yet the Palestinians are negotiating to give Israel 78 percent. This should be seen as a great deal by the Israelis. They're only heightening the enmity now by claiming still more.

Somewhere, USA: You say "How can any Palestinian think the Israelis are serious about peace when they see the land being taken out from underneath them."

Couldn't one similarly ask how the Palestinians can be serious about peace when they demand the right to migrate to areas inside of the state of Israel's pre-1967 borders?

If you oppose settlement of Jews in the West Bank then shouldn't you also oppose settling Palestinians inside of the State of Israel?

Michael Brown: There's a huge difference. Palestinians living in Israel are willing to live under a government of Israel. Israeli settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories are not willing to live under a Palestinian government.

There are lots of Palestinian Americans here who still have homes standing inside Israel. I think our government should stand up for them and say that their house should not be stolen. And I likewise think that Jews who had their houses and property stolen in Europe and the Middle East should have a claim.

Boston, Mass.: How can Israel be expected to withdraw from anywhere, when groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Arafat's own Fatah, have already stated that they will not accept any peace plan?

Michael Brown: This is a good question. I don't blame Israelis for being fearful. But they need to ask themselves hard questions. Do they really have more security today than they did prior to Sharon's winning the election? I think the clear answer to that is no.

Sharon has no interest in a negotiated solution. He has said that and his whole history points to it. He has opposed at one level or another every peace deal Israel ever made.

Chantilly, Va.: Mr. Brown: perhaps you can look into your crystal ball and confirm that there will be no suicide bombings inside Israel if the Israelis comply with all of your demands.

Perhaps you could also tell us when the PLO charter will be amended so as not to call for the destruction of the State of Israel.

Michael Brown: I was there in the room with Clinton and others when it was amended in 1998. This is brought up all the time and is false.

Washington, D.C.: Is there a difference in the governance of the West Bank and Gaza? Are they both presided over by Arafat? Is Israel's role different in them? What is the effect of the Gaza fence?

Michael Brown: The effect of the Gaza fence is that Palestinians feel as though they live in a huge open-air prison. For the Israelis they believe it brings them greater security. This is probably why most attacks from Gaza focus on the settlers and not Israel.

Gaza is a clear-cut case for me having lived there for significant periods of time. Some 5,000 Israeli settlers control slightly more than one third of the land. Some 1.1 million Palestinians are squeezed into the rest. If that's not apartheid I don't know what is.

Bethesda, MD: I'd like to comment about your response to the individual from Silver Spring regarding the Palestinians' desire to have all of land from the Jordan River to the Mediteranean Sea.

I certainly agree with you that additional settlements in the West Bank should be stopped and most current ones should be dismantled, but you totally skirt the question. Despite the issue of the settlements, the question at hand is how can you deal with a people whose sole desire is to wipe out the land of Israel. This has been echoed in offical Palestinian documents throughout the years.

I ask you to consider this and the previous question and offer a response to the actual question at hand. Thank you.

Michael Brown: The Palestinian people want peace. When the fighting cranks up and their children are being killed then groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad are strengthened. But when there is a serious negotiation underway then Palestinians have shown a willingness to live in peace with their neighbors.

We see the same movement in Israel. Close to 40 percent of Israelis recently said they back the ethnic transfer of Palestinians.

When Sharon says that talk of a Palestinian state is "premature" let's consider the language. Where have we heard this before? In the statements of whites in the American south that the time is not right for equal rights for African Americans. For me, Sharon's words echo those of Gov. Wallace: Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.

Our government simply must insist that Sharon negotiate. We're giving Israel billions of dollars a year and because these funds are fungible it means that we are helping to fund the settlements -- not to mention that American-made weaponry is being used on Palestinians in refugee camps. I've seen these weapons used against Palestinians in Gaza. We're not doing ourselves any favors by letting this happen. It's done in your name and mine when a Palestinian kid is blown up with American weaponry. The Leahy amendment out to be looked into when our weapons are being used by human rights abusers. And every credible human rights group out there is saying that Israel is purposefully hitting civilians. Look it up at Human Rights Watch or Amnesty or even at Israel's B'Tselem.

Alexandria, Va.: I noticed that you commenced with a ritualistic criticism of suicide bombings.

Do these bombings hurt the Palestinian cause?

If so, have you told Palestinians that suicide bombings harm the Palestinians themselves? What is their response?

Michael Brown: I regret that you feel my condemnation of suicide bombings was ritualistic. Violence directed at both sides is appalling.

I have had numerous conversations with Palestinians expressing my sentiment about suicide bombings. Some agree and others will say that if they are going to kill our kids then we must kill theirs to make them feel the same pain. I read similar quotes from Israelis all the time. It's a race to the bottom.

I believe that our country could help if we got involved in a determined way with the negotiations but that is not happening. The bottom line is that this administration and its predecessors have not shown the necessary gumption to stand up to Israeli abuses. Instead, they (through Congress) take our taxes and continue to pour it in there. If we told the Israelis our aid would stop if settlement activity continued then you better believe Israel would start thinking seriously about its actions. Israel is an American friend and ally but we do the people of Israel no favors by aiding and abetting the course they are on. A true friend would say, "You too are making mistakes." We don't do that and it is costing us in how we are viewed around the world.

Rockville, Md.: The percentages given for Israel and Palestine as parts of the Mandate are incorrect in that the mandate terrirory also included what is now Jordan, an areas that dwarfs the other two combined and IS an Arab area. Also, Jordan annexed the current West Bank territories that should have been a Palenstinian state (although in 1948, when the Arabs started a war to prevent the creastion of Israel, there were no self identified Palestinians) and they did nothing to improve the lot of the refugee residents.

Michael Brown: No. The UN divided the land West of the Jordan for two states. I am talking here about 1947 and the partition plan.

Comments such as this hit very close to Sharon's that Jordan is the Palestinian state. Forcing Palestinians across the Jordan is ethnic cleansing.

Is that what you are proposing?

Berkeley, Calif.: Since the current intifada began, we have seen not only the appalling death and injury tolls, but also mass arrests and detentions. We hear that Marwan Barghouti, a political leader seized April 13th, is being tortured, along with unknown numbers of others less newsworthy. What can your organization do, and what can "ordinary" citizens do at the grassroots level, to put an end to this ridiculous, counterproductive cruelty?

Michael Brown: The human rights organization LAW says that Barghouthi is being subjected to forms of torture Israel's high court was supposed to put an end to in September of 1999.

In recent months I have seen increasing evidence that Israel is using torture. My organization has documented it even with American citizens of Palestinian origin. We've known about this for 25 years yet we have yet to make a public condemnation of this. This is outrageous.

In recent weeks we've seen American humanitarian workers detained without charges for weeks on end for trying to get food into the Church of the Nativity. If the PA had done this it would be a major issue in the press. Instead, these young Americans were left sitting in an Israeli prison with no charges against them and no government official publicly advocating on their behalf. American Paul Larudee was shot in the foot. Fulbright scholar and Eagle Scout Andy Clarno was beaten. Our government needs to speak out against the beatings, detentions, and even killings of Americans by an Israeli military funded by us.

Torture by Israel was once a news story. It needs to be again.

Charlottesville, Va.: If Arafat is killed by the Israelis, how in your opinion would this affect the chances for future peace and stability between Arabs and Israelis? Would the violence escalate?

Michael Brown: I think the violence would escalate. It's very possible that leaders with less interest in peace than Arafat would assume power though I think the most likely scenario would be a political void.

Most Palestinian leaders are going to demand at least as much as Arafat. It's simply unthinkable that Palestinians will say uncle and yes we submit to bantustans. The Israeli intelligence gatherers aren't doing a good job if they think this is the case.

I must admit that sometimes I think saying uncle would be the best answer. Then the absurdity of Israel's position would be exposed in full. The Palestinians would have only one caveat: That they be allowed to vote. Demographically Israel doesn't want that but it can't be a Jewish state and control all the land or it won't be a democracy. For that reason, it is in Israel's interests to go with a two-state solution rather than trying to take all the West Bank.

San Luis Obispo, Calif.: The Israeli Government seem to be requiring the Palestinians to develop security and democratic institutions while under attack or threat of attack. Is this possible?

Michael Brown: Everything Israel is saying now about Palestinian reform is aimed at delaying meaningful negotiations. And it's nothing I haven't heard from Palestinians for years.

Bethesda, Md.: You continue to speak of Israeli's killing Palestinian children. Isn't it the case that those kids are attacking the Israeli's at the time? Don't you see that is different than shooting children in their beds or blowing people up as they dine in a hotel or ride a bus?

Michael Brown: As I said, every single credible human rights group says that Israel is purposefully killing Palestinian civilians. Either you have to say that all these credible human rights groups are liars or begin to grapple with the sad reality of what Israel is doing in the occupied territories.

Palestinian children are being taken down by snipers from immense distances. Five Palestinian children were blown up last year by a mine Israel planted.

All I ask is that you read the human rights reports. Our own State Department has documented this too in its annual human rights report.

washingtonpost.com:

That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.

Stay tuned to Live Online:

Analysis: CIA Terrorism Warnings at 2 p.m. EDT
Daniela Deane: Real Estate Live at 2 p.m. EDT
Author, Food TV Host Alton Brown at 3 p.m. EDT

Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live Online transcripts.

Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters.

NEW! Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com. Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.

Fairfax, Va.: Mr. Brown. Given your initial comments, your associations and your initial response to questions, it is clear to me your sympathies lie with the Palestinians. In fairness, let me first say, I am an American Jew and my sympathies lie with the Israelis. Not everything America or its government does is right, moral or just, but in any foreign conflict I must fully support the foreign policy of this nation. I feel the same about Israel.

Having said that, my question to you as a Palestinian sympathizer is: Just what do the Palestinians want? They were offered substantially all of the West Bank and Gaza, evacuation of a significant portion of the settlements, virtually all of Arab East Jerusalem, a reasonable accommodation of the refugee situation, economic and social ties, a fair resolution of water rights, and more, not once, but twice at Camp David and Taba. They refused that and took up arms and terrorism. In my view, the answer to the question is self-evident. They want the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of Jews worldwide.

Is Israel right in every response it makes and every step it takes to this situation? Of course not. But it is fighting for its very life, as it has from its inception. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fateh/Al Aksa, Hezbollah, and the state sponsors of terrorism like Syria and Iran, are all committed to the complete destruction of the State of Israel. Even so-called “moderate” Arab states, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, foster the most vile anti-semitic slander against Jews and Israel, and make possible the continued warfare of the last 75 years.

What I find breathtakingly hypocritical about the Palestinians, Arab and Muslim nations is their absolute refusal to admit any fault in the present conflict, or the validity of any contrary position to their condemnation and justification of continued assaults and terrorism against Jews and Israel. I have found not a scintilla of remorse or acceptance of responsibility in the Arab press or Palestinian intellectual discourse. All I have found is the continued insistence on Israeli withdrawals and concessions, with its implicit position that Israel’s evacuation of the West Bank would stop terrorism. This is rhetorical warfare at its worst.

There will never be peace if the Palestinians do not want peace. So, what do the Palestinians want?

Michael Brown: Thank you for the question. I think it highlights quite effectively the concerns of Israelis. Those concerns and fears are very real. Likewise, what I have attempted to show today is that Palestinians also have fears and concerns about Israeli intentions. Ratcheting up violence by either side will only exacerbate that.

But Palestinians are also convinced that Sharon wants a ceasefire to do precisely nothing. Sharon has given no indication otherwise.

What do Palestinians want? They want 22 percent of the land from the UN partition. They aren't going for a 50-50 split or even for the 43 percent promised. Just 22. They want the settlers colonizing the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem out. The Palestinians expelled from what is now Israel want the right to return. Why should they be ethnically cleansed. Would you not demand that right in their position? But it also seems to be the case that the Palestinians are willing to negotiate aspects of the right. Frankly, I find it racist to say that Palestinian friends of mine returning to homes in Israel would destroy the state of Israel. Even so, the Palestinian leadership is willing to negotiate this.

Palestinians want control over their borders and East Jerusalem. They want control over their water so that they are not forced to use their dishwater to flush their toilets while Israeli settlers water their lawns and swim in pools in the heat of the day.

What they most explicitly do not want is series of bantustans. Progress was being made at Taba. The Israeli elections have dealt a critical blow to that progress.

As for who started this in September of 2000 I think your analysis is wrong. Sharon was looking to stir things up both for Barak and in general. He succeeded. Look at the numbers of Palestinians killed in the initial days of fighting and ask yourself in the Palestinians had really planned this out. They were butchered and it went from there. The logic of violence has led to more violence.

Michael Brown: To wrap up:

It's clear from questions that there is a lot of fear on the Israeli side. I have been fortunate enough to have lived in Gaza for lengthy periods of time. The situation there is tough but people were desperate to tell me their stories. Accounts that are too seldom heard here.

They too have fears. They too have hopes. But when their road to work or to school is closed then those hopes turn to frustration. The saddest part for me is that their interaction with Jews is almost exclusively through being in the cross-hairs of a gun. Try explaining, as I have, outside a shot-up mosque in Rafah that Jews in the US have been and are at the forefront of the civil rights and human rights movements in this country and it's not easy. The experience of Palestinians there is with soldiers and settlers blowing up their homes, shooting their children, and taking their land. Israeli human rights groups do go more to the West Bank so this side of Israel is better known there though I wish it were better.

The bottom line is that there are still Muslims, Jews, and Christians there who want a just peace and are willing to work together. This is something to hold fast to when some 500 Israelis have been killed and over 1500 Palestinians in the past 21 months. Israelis do put their bodies in front of bulldozers trying to demolish Palestinian homes. Palestinians in these homes invite these Israelis to share tea with them. These contacts, few and far between these days, do exist.

But they need our help. We need to reject Palestinian terrorism but have the wisdom to see that while the means are not always just the cause itself is. Likewise, we need to reject Israeli settlement activity and human rights abuses that result in Palestinian civilians being killed.

At this summer's conference the US must put its cards on the table and try to determine whether Sharon is serious about negotiations. If not, we need to call him on it. With 34 new Israeli settlements in the past year it seems he is doing his best to head off a contiguous Palestinian state. If this is the case then Bush and Powell should speak up clearly. Likewise, the US should ask Arafat if he is serious about accepting just 22 percent of the divided land. I suspect the US will find he is.

Thank you for your concerns and questions. Please check out our web site next week at partnersforpeace.org when it is given a complete overhaul. We have good information there about our work on detention without charges and torture of American citizens in Israel as well as about our work with the Jerusalem Women Speak tours to show that there are Muslims, Jews, and Christians willing to work together for a just resolution -- even today.

   |      |