Chapter Activities

Brit Tzedek v'Shalom

Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace

Portland, OR

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
April 30, 2004
V.XXIII; N.3 p. 53

Portlanders Debate Whether or Not to Support Geneva Accord
Kelley, Elaine

Sister Elaine Kelley, based in Portland, OR, is administrative officer of Friends of Sabeel-North America.

If the Geneva Accord were a Shakespeare play it might be Much Ado About Nothing, a comic story of lovers beset by sensational plots, arranged marriage and zany characters working their way through an array of words in Shakespeare's "skirmish of wits." Like the great bard's wordsmithing, the language of the Geneva Accord leaves one with the same sense that all is not as it seems--that conspiracies are afoot, hiding behind walls, eavesdropping, and name-calling. Whom are we to believe? Can we trust those who are promoting the Geneva Accord?

Is Palestinian negotiator Yasser Abed Rabbo one of Palestine's best and brightest, as supporters contend, or is he to be implicated for the failure of Oslo? And is former Israeli Minister of Justice Yossi Beilin to be lauded for the courage of his convictions, or portrayed as an elitist multimillionaire son-of-a-banker? Who can tell what is really going on here? In Shakespeare's play, the two main characters are fooled into making a declaration of love--then deception is uncovered. Such was the case with the Oslo accords. Is history repeating itself?

Anti-occupation activists divided over the Geneva Accord are seeking guidance from movement leaders on whether to hail it as the best laid plan for a final and comprehensive agreement, or to wave red flags over what is perceived as fine-print conspiracies intended to rub out existing rights under international law. Three public discussions in Portland during December and January are perhaps illustrative of the nuances within the peace movement. The various interpretations revealed, while not endangering the unity on ending Israel's occupation, served to fuel debate on the Accord.

Three events in Portland focusing on the Geneva Accord featured a number of speakers, including Tom Getman, director of humanitarian affairs and international relations for World Vision in Geneva, and former director of World Vision Palestine. Getman's Dec. 8 presentation was sponsored by Friends of Sabeel, Episcopal Relief and Development (Seattle), and Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights. Tikkun Community national organizer Robyn Lundy spoke Jan. 28 under the aegis of P'Nai Or Congregation of Portland. A Jan. 26 panel of presenters sponsored by Brit Tzedek at Portland's Havurah Shalom Synagogue included two Palestinians--Frank Afranji, a Palestinian born in Ramallah who has long been active in Palestinian-Israeli dialogue, and Shaaban Naim from Gaza; Rabbi Ariel Stone-Halpern, who recently completed a research fellowship in Jerusalem, where she also participated in a number of dialogue projects among Israel's different population groups; and Aaron Vitells, an Israeli-born activist and religious leader.

"One reason there is so much attention being focused on the Geneva Accord is that the president of the United States has refused to take responsibility for what he promised on the road map," observed Getman, speaking at the Lake Oswego United Church of Christ one week after the signing of the Accord attended by Nobel Peace Laureates. The World Vision executive criticized the Dec. 1 ceremony as being "a closed event with only elites present" and described former Israeli Justice Minister Beilin, a chief architect of the plan, as someone who "knows nothing about the Middle East."

The charge of elitism--and that the Accord authors are the very same who designed Oslo--is one that echoes among GA critics, including Getman, in whose opinion "some elites once again [are] putting information out that stirs up lots of interest but isn't going to be very effective on the ground."

Before leaving Geneva for the U.S., Getman said, he had written down 20 reasons to be encouraged--among them initiatives being made by large numbers of people, and one referendum signed by several hundred thousand expressing their desire for something positive to happen to resolve the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. "I've been in touch with people in the initiative and Accord groups urging them to be more attentive to Palestinian civil society," Getman stated, noting that efforts are being made in a panic because "Bush is not following through." Referring to a conspicuous flaw in the Geneva Accord--its position on the right of return--Getman argued that "the right of return is the core of consensus" for the Palestinian people. All initiatives that compromise this national consensus must be rejected, he emphasized, adding, "If only elites are involved, this [GA] will fail like Oslo failed."

All four panelists at the Jan. 26 Brit Tzedek event concurred in their support of the Geneva Accord. "I think if the extremists say it [the Geneva Accord] is no good, then I must feel good about it," stated Vitells, eliciting laughter with that opening remark. He described the drafters of the Accord as "the best people on the Israeli and Palestinian sides," working on the basis of respect and dignity and equality. "Extreme care was taken to deal with the most important issues" in a ratio of one-to-one, he said, comparing it to Camp David, where the "Israelis demanded a ratio of 9-to-1 and expected the Palestinians to say 'thank you.'" According to Vitells, in "the rumbling about right of return" it is only the extremists on both sides who oppose the Accord for this reason."

Frank Afranji cited the features of the GA that inspired his support--specifically its clarity on ending the conflict, the final settlement of open issues, the recognition of two states with defined borders and secure boundaries, the guarantee of international inspectors, the call for an end to terrorism and violence on both sides--not just the Palestinian side--a fair division of the city of Jerusalem, and detailed steps which Afranji believes will lead to a lasting peace.

Gazan Shabaan Naim, who, along with Afranji, participates in a Muslim-Jewish dialogue group, indicated that his support for the GA stems from a desire for an end to hostilities and a safe home for his family. He characterized those who are paying attention to the Accord as part of the grassroots movement frustrated by governmental inaction. "You must get together and model for your elected officials how you would like them to behave," Naim stated, "or you go anarchist and break things." Something like the GA helps to channel pent up anger on both sides, he added: "You can bring about a groundswell if you live in a democracy."

"We have to hesitate before forming our strongest conviction," said Rabbi Stone-Halpern, who, having just spent two years in Jerusalem, said she could convey a sense of what it was like to fear getting on a bus or going to a cafe. "I see those in the establishment fighting against any accord," she said. "Sharon and Arafat are locked in a dance in a graveyard full of Arab and Jewish graves." She appreciates that the GA "takes seriously that you can't change attitudes overnight," she explained, while at the same time giving some hope. "It's like getting a divorce but still having to share the same apartment," she noted.

Lundy, national organizer of Tikkun, a predominantly Jewish organization based in Berkeley and headed by Rabbi Michael Lerner, spoke Jan. 28 at Portland State University Campus Ministries. A former trial lawyer who was raised in South Africa, she said she had learned about "recognizing commonalities" between peoples from Nelson Mandela in that country's struggle against apartheid. "I was there, and if it can work there, it can work anywhere," referring to the principle of Tikkun, a Hebrew word similar to the Arabic Taqween, which means "to heal, to repair and to transform" (and is also the Arabic name for the Old Testament book of Genesis).

Lundy described Tikkun's vision of hope as based in a spiritual dimension which the organization finds "lacking in the agendas of most progressive social change movements." The organization has an online petition in support of the Geneva Accord, which it describes as a "legalistic document" that "would be acceptable to the mainstream in both Israeli and Palestinian societies."

In answer to objections that the document's drafters were elites who did not consult the Palestinian people, Lundy stated that there is "a problem with American groups who purport to know what the Palestinians will support," adding, "I think the average Palestinian mother would gladly give up a theoretical right of return" for normalcy and a peaceful existence.

The U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation has published a statement warning that the Geneva Accord does not fully apply international law and human rights to the conflict, does not completely end the occupation. It instead accuses the Accord of "building people's hopes and diverting their energies through high profile negotiations and agreements that never fully address the roots of the conflict."

Lundy said Tikkun has worked with the U.S. Campaign, but warned the audience, "Don't believe everything that every progressive leftist group says, because they have an agenda, too."

Since the media first reported the signing of the Geneva Accord, however, it has been virtually silent on the initiative. Even supporters of the Accord concede that few policymakers are giving it any serious attention. But the grassroots is paying attention--at least in Oregon--and more discussion is being planned. Dr. Samih al-Abed, another key Palestinian GA negotiating figure, is expected to speak at Willamette University Law School in Salem, Oregon, in February.

Articles may be reprinted with proper attribution, except for photos and cartoons. Article copyright American Educational Trust.

[back to Oregon main page]