Meeting of Israeli and Palestinian MPs

Establishment of a working group of Israeli and Palestinian elected representatives

Meeting of Israeli and Palestinian MPs in Geneva

A delegation from the Knesset and a delegation from the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) held their first meeting for three years, at the new IPU Headquarters in Geneva on the 17th July 2003.

The meeting took place at the invitation of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) and the Swiss Inter-Parliamentary Group, in cooperation with the "Manifesto – Movement for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" and with the support of the Geneva authorities. The aim of the meeting was to renew the dialogue between the two parties, both of whom take part in the activities of the IPU.

At the end of the discussions it was agreed to establish a working group of Israeli and Palestinian elected representatives that would work to increase cooperation. The group will prepare the infrastructure for cooperation between the two elected parliaments.

The meeting was chaired by Mr. Finn Martin Vallersnes, member of the Norwegian Parliament and President of the IPU’s Committee on Middle East Questions.

The Head of the Israeli delegation, Mr. Avraham Burg, former Speaker of the Knesset and member of the Labour party, and the Head of the Palestinian delegation, Mr. Abdelkader Hamed “Kaddoura”, from the Palestinian Legislative Council and member of the Fatah party, explain the importance of this meeting.

Avraham Burg :
"We will offer both sides an alternative to violence and this is our mission"

The Israeli delegation was composed by (from left to right) Mr. R. Chayne, Mr. A. Burg, Mr. A. Vilan and Mr. M. Whebee.

Q : Mr. Burg, concretely, how are you going to work with the members of the PLC ?
A.B.: I do hope that the result of this Geneva meeting will be one working group. With my experience in human life once you are sitting in the same group, during the process, you erase the differences. I am coming from side A and he is coming from side B and we work together towards the same goal. I do hope that sitting together in the same room we shall forget all the previous bad blood and we shall work together towards a better future. Parliaments represent people, democratically and publicly. We will offer both sides an alternative to violence and this is our mission.

Q : Are you also going to try to convince both of your leaders and governments ?
A.B.: I believe that persuasion of governments does not come by saying : “We think this, so you say that”, but if the public sees that there is a real alternative, it will tell the governments what to do. My role is to mobilise the public and the public will mobilise the government.

Abdelkhader Hamed Farhès Kaddoura :
"It is a good thing to try to have a direct dialogue because we tried another kind of dialogue in the field, the worst sort using weapons"

The Palestinian delegation was composed of (from left to right), Mr. A. Elhabbash, Mr Ab.Hamed Farhès Kaddoura and Mr. K.H. Tibi.

Q : How would you assess the importance of this meeting ?
A.H.F.K. : It is a good thing to sit down with the Israelis and to try to have a direct dialogue. We tried the worst sort, using weapons, with each side blaming the other. The Palestinians suffered from this kind of dialogue, and the Israelis did too. When it comes to dialogue, the Israelis must understand that no State in the history of the world can destroy a people that wants freedom. We understand that the Israeli State has the right to live near our State in security. In this space, we can have a final peace agreement. The question is when the Israelis will understand that they cannot have occupation and security at the same time. Unfortunately the Israelis think they can. The Israeli State made a big strategic mistake with the settlers. They know that under international law, and in the UN decisions the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem are occupied territories. They built the settlements, and now they are asking us to understand their internal problems and to change the borders for the final solution of the peace agreement. As far as the meeting is concerned, I think that the IPU must have a much more important role. It must tell us and the Israelis when we are wrong, because we feel all the time that we are right on all the issues, and the Israelis feels the same thing. This is the difficulty of the dialogue and the negotiations. During these meetings, we need to take one important issue and to discuss all the details, in order reach conclusions, so that when we return to our countries we can do what we have accepted to do, here, together. I have belonged to Palestinian delegations and we have met hundreds of Israelis. For the last ten years we spoke about peace, saying that we want peace, we love peace, but in the field the situation is different. We are not only members of our parliaments, we are also members of parties that play a big role among our two people.

Q : Does this mean that you want to have more concrete proposals or decisions taken during the IPU meetings with your Israeli counterparts ?
A.H.F.K. : Yes. In another meeting we must try to answer the question : what kind of peace do we, the Palestinians want. And the Israelis must tell us what kind of peace they want. To try to understand. Maybe they want peace with settlements or they want peace without withdrawal of their soldiers from the West Bank. We must know what kind of peace they want. And they must know what kind of peace the Palestinians want. Then we will understand the difficulties. We can say : we accept these ten issues and we have three or four more that we have to continue to discuss. It is not a negotiation. The negotiations will be made by the negotiators, the governments. But maybe, in one year or more, Mr. Avraham Burg will be the Prime Minister of Israel and may be Mr. Jawad Tibi will become Minister in another Palestinian government. Then they will draw conclusions and it will be their policy in the government. When I return home, I will have conclusions about a concrete point, and when the media asks me, I will respond. Maybe ten Palestinians will listen to me; three will accept and seven not. And after two months, maybe seven will accept and three will reject. It is how to make public opinion.

Q : Are you ready to tell your people that this is the right moment to try to work together with your counterparts in the Knesset ?
A.H.F.K. : I think that if we wait for the right moment, we will go on waiting another 50 years ! It is the right time to speak to each other now.

Interview with Mr. Finn Martin Vallersnes, President of the IPU Committee on Middle East Questions

"Every time you reach agreement on a small subject, you also put a new brick on to the wall of confidence"

Q. : QWhat is your assessment of the meeting between Israeli and Palestinian MPs organised by the IPU and the Manifesto-Movement for a long and lasting peace in the Middle East, with the support of the Geneva authorities ?
F.M.V. : The situation and the conflict is still very serious and difficult. My expectations were therefore modest before our July meeting. My main impression after the meeting is however the positive openness, constructive activities and good atmosphere that both delegations displayed. This was in turn the reason why we succeeded in adopting by consensus the statement leading to the establishment of the working group, which we shall follow up this autumn. I highly appreciate the strong effort made by all members of the 2 delegations. Both IPU and I shall of course do our utmost to meet their expectations towards us as organizer and facilitator.

Q. : What do you expect from Israeli and Palestinian MPs ?
F.M.V. : I expect them to meet the challenge of developing further the basis which was laid in July. Experience has shown us that any progress in the peace process frequently generates negative and violent reactions from extremists opposing peace as an end result. I expect the two delegations to continue their efforts even if the surrounding circumstances get difficult. I do not expect them to start up by trying to find solutions to the greater and most difficult problems. My prescription will rather be the approach of taking it step by step. Every time you reach agreement on a small subject, you also put a new brick on to the wall of confidence. That will enable us gradually to address more complicated problems.

Q. : How would you evaluate the role of parliamentary diplomacy in the Middle East ?
F.M.V. : I am naturally influenced by the political culture of my own country and parliament. I see the parliamentarians having two important functions in this relation: as parliamentarians they have a role of overseeing the actions and the policy of their own government. That is true both for the members of the opposition and for those belonging to the governmental side. Parliaments have many functions, but they should also be a forum for quality control of the actions of the government. Second, the parliamentarians represent the people, being elected by the people. In our case, that gives them a two-way task. A majority of the peoples in Palestine and in Israel want a peaceful solution, they want security in their daily lives, - they want the "normal, good" lives we all want for ourselves and for our families. If the parliamentarians really represent their voters, their work should contribute to that end. On the other side, elected parliamentarians can be very influential towards the formation of public opinion. That gives them a special challenge to explain the necessity of a political framework for a comprehensive development towards peace, - by a process characterized by many interdependent components like economic recovery, humanitarian aid and stable military and political construction. It is my belief that the process will only move forward in a sustainable manner, if everyone concerned moves simultaneously and in the same direction. That includes governments, parliaments, civil society organizations and most important: the ordinary man and woman on the street. To that end the MP's have a crucial job to do.