Brit Tzedek has been pleased to provide you with information and analysis on the Mideast crisis from some of the world's foremost policy analysts and political leaders during the past five weeks through our Town Hall conference  call series.  

We have copied below the postscript from the August 20, 2006 call with Yossi Beilin for your review.  Brit Tzedek also has postscripts, recordings, and background materials from the entire series available on our website for your review at  A special thanks to board member David Albert who with Deputy Director Aliza Becker oversaw the selection, recruitment and preparation of speakers and moderators, to Ariel Chasnoff for transcribing the calls, and to Eduardo Gabrieloff for timely website postings.   

"After the Ceasefire: What Comes Next?" with Yossi Beilin

I believe that we find ourselves—in the beginning of the ceasefire after thirty-three days of the second war in Lebanon—in a very strange situation.  One of the most interesting results is that it is a kind of a meeting point of weak leaders.  We are talking about Bashar al-Asad of Syria—who is considered much weaker than his father, who is boycotted by the Americans and not only by them, who was pushed into a corner to create an alliance with Iran, and who is backing Hezbollah despite the fact that he is representing a very secular regime while Hezbollah is one of the most religious movements in the region. Even after a period in which there was very tough tension between Syria and Hezbollah, even bloodshed, years ago, he is not considered as strong as his father.  He has suggested several times to negotiate with Israel on a peace agreement and was rejected, first by Sharon and then by Olmert.  
Another weak leader is Fuad Saniora.  Fuad Siniora is the Prime Minister of Lebanon—he is considered a moderate, a pragmatic leader, close to the late Rafik Hariri.  He is close to the west—the Americans are supporting him very much.  Many western countries would like to see him stronger, and we are watching him struggle with his president, the Christian Emile Lahoud, who is close to Syria, and of course with Hezbollah which became a kind of state within a state, an army within a state.  He [Seniora] would like to see a peaceful development; he was the one who called for a ceasefire a month ago, and there is no question that had it been up to him we could have had peace with Lebanon, but unfortunately it is not only up to him.
The third weak leader is Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).  Rather than negotiating with him when he became the Palestinian president, Sharon preferred not to negotiate with him and go on with his unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.  In the meantime Hamas won the parliamentary elections, and Mahmoud Abbas became an even weaker leader who doesn’t have a majority in his party.  Officially he is the leader of both the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, but practically, he is restricted and limited by Hamas and is far from being in the situation in which he can do exactly what he wants. He is considered one of the most moderate Palestinian leaders and had it been up to him he would have liked to have a permanent agreement with Israel—he said so many many times.  
There is a new weak leader in this strange club, and his name is Ehud Olmert.  Until a month ago he was considered a new promise, backed by Bush, by the Americans, supported by many leaders and countries in the world, the new hope of Israel who formed the government with the Labor Party and Amir Peretz, and promised to put an end to our occupation in the West bank and even talked about withdrawing from 90% of the West Bank eventually. He did not believe it was possible to negotiate with the Palestinians for a permanent agreement but he did believe that Israel should not remain in the territories. His electoral agenda was a convergence plan of moving many, maybe 70,000, settlers from the eastern side of the security fence to the western side of it.  Today, after more than a month of war, he did not fulfill the promise, he is not considered as the one who won this war.  He cannot go on with the convergence plan and has already said that for the time being his plan should be shelved and one should deal only with the reconstruction of the Galilee, the north. His support in public opinion went down dramatically to unprecedented numbers and he is only 100 days into his job as an elected Prime Minister.  His government is already shaky, he is already considered a kind of a lame duck, he is struggling against the demand to have an investigative committee but I believe eventually he will have to comply with this because the public call is very strong.  He will have to find a new agenda.  For the time being his agenda is just maintenance. I believe that he himself knows that this is not attractive enough.  
The fifth weak leader, of course, is President Bush.  His support as you know is very low. He is approaching elections for the Congress in which he might lose his majority.  Those who are close to him ideologically, like Senator Lieberman, are paying a political price for it.  Iraq seems right now as a very big failure, and his plan to democratize the non-democratic states seems today a very big failure.  
The question I am asking myself and I am asking you is whether in certain situations one can hope for a change just because of this weakness.  Is it possible to use, or, in inverted quotations, to “exploit”, this weakness so that decent leaders will understand that they might find a common denominator by going for something big enough which might serve the national interest and save their political lives?  I do believe that the role of the peace camp, wherever it is—Israel, Palestine, in other places, in the United State—is to try and push for this big thing, and one of the options for such a big thing is to have a second Madrid Conference fifteen years after the first one which took place on October 31 1991.  My idea is that we should push for something like this so that Syria, Lebanon, Palestinians, Israelis, and of course America or the Quartet, will participate in such a conference, will launch bi-lateral talks between Israel and Syria, Israel and Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinians, and try to suggest that in a few months it could be possible to have peace treaties with our neighbors.  
I must admit that right now it might seem quite detached from reality.  The reality seems very gloomy when you think about Israel, when you think of these thirty days of nightmare in which it was almost a courageous step to go from Tel Aviv to Haifa.  And people do think that this mighty army of ours could not overcome the small militia of Hezbollah in a short while.  So the question right now is whether the embarrassment, the confusion, the gloomy feelings and the weakness of the leaders, might lead us, at the appropriate time, to go toward something which will attract the attention of the peoples in the region, of the peoples in the world, away from this sadness, or darkness, into a hope and into light.  This is the question.  
I don’t want to be a commentator and I don’t want to analyze exactly what went wrong, what happened, what exactly is the situation right now, because I do not believe I am a subjective commentator.  I can see things from my own very narrow point of view in which I can only tell you, that had we only been wise enough to make peace with Syria and with the Palestinians and with the Lebanese when it was possible years ago we wouldn’t have found ourselves in this situation and in war with Lebanon at the beginning of the twenty first century.  But we failed in the past, we made our mistakes, and we have to face the future and the new challenges and ask ourselves whether it is possible now.  And this is the question that I am asking myself, that I am asking my constituency, and trying to ask other constituencies, and I am asking you.

Q&A followed this address, and is available for listening here

Brit Tzedek Town Hall Conference Calls on the Mideast Crisis

“After the Ceasefire: What Comes Next?” with Yossi Beilin, August 20, 2006

“From Crisis to Ceasefire” with Naomi Chazan, August 6, 2006

“The US Role in the Current Crisis” with Dr. James J. Zogby and Dr. Stephen P. Cohen, July 27, 2006

“Report from the Ground: The Humanitarian Situation in Israel and the Palestinian Territories” with Rabbi Arik Ascherman, July 23, 2006

“The Mideast Crisis in Israel, Gaza, and Lebanon” with Daniel Levy, July 16, 2006

Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, The Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace
11 E. Adams Street, Suite 707
Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: (312) 341-1205
Fax: (312) 341-1206

Donate: Help build on Brit Tzedek's success.

Share this message: Tell others about Brit Tzedek v'Shalom.

Receive regular updates: Click if you received this message from a friend, and would like to get regular updates from Brit Tzedek v'Shalom.

More information: Click to see our website.

This message was sent to . Visit your subscription management page to modify your email communication preferences or update your personal profile. Click here (or reply via email with "remove" in the subject line) to remove yourself from ALL email lists maintained by Brit Tzedek v'Shalom.