THE BEILEN-MAZEN HOAX
Brock Rozen
Sender: im...@netvision.net.il
Subject: THE BEILEN-MAZEN HOAX
THE BEILEN-MAZEN HOAX
Aaron Lerner 3 August, 1996
Prof. Yair Hirschfeld's interview in the July 1996 issue of
"Nekuda" about what has come to be known as the "Beilin-Mazen"
document provides more insight into the incredible naivte of the
architects of the "Oslo process" than it does hope that a workable
agreement may be eventually reached with Yasser Arafat. For some
reason, most coverage of the interview, which sheds light on
negotiations over the final agreement which took place under the
guise of "academic discussions", fails to address the gaping holes
which Hirschfeld himself concedes remain.
The Israeli concessions which Hirschfeld offered, in consultation
with Deputy Minister Yossi Beilin (and Prime Minister Shimon Peres'
knowledge at some stage), are fairly clear. Israel already agreed
to the creation of a Palestinian state in at least 90% of Judea and
Samaria which would also control the Temple Mount and have free
access to it and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Israel would
also relinquish sovereignty over the Old City area of Jerusalem.
Prof. Hirschfeld is so proud of this achievement that he is
convinced to this day that if the agreement had been publicized
that Peres would have defeated Netanyahu at the polls. The
opposite is the case.
For while Israel agreed to major concessions, the Palestinians kept
their options open. While the Palestinians supposedly agreed to
keeping the settlements in place "there will be negotiations on the
relations between the settlements and the Palestinian Authority.
It wasn't finalized. At no stage was there a mutual agreement on
this matter between us and the Palestinians [all quotes are from
the "Nekuda" interview - A.L.]." This is nothing new. Palestinian
officials have said from time to time that they would consider
allowing Jews to remain inside the Palestinian state. The trick is
that Jewish property rights would be considered within the context
of Palestinian law. So the settlements could stay in place, that
is, until the "rightful" owners of the land they are sitting on go
to court.
And what about resolving the problem of Jerusalem? "The Old City
itself would be without sovereignty, but in practice there would be
Israeli sovereignty, not recognized by the Palestinians, under the
control of the Jerusalem municipality. In other words, only the
Israel police would be there, and no other police. All this wasn't
formally agreed to, but there was an understanding that this was a
very serious basis for negotiations...Negotiations on the matter of
sovereignty will be put off to much later stages, wihtout time
limit...We weren't reaching a final solution of the problem of
sovereignty. This was agreed to by the two sides."
A final solution without a solution! Sounds a bit premature to
break out the champagne?
Hirschfeld was convinced that this amorphous agreement was so
fantastic that if published before the elections "a large part of
the settler public would also vote for it, because for them it
would guarantee a secure existence for eternity" - that's right -
no less than "eternity"!
Did Hirschfeld anticipate that Israel would have to make additional
concessions? The good professor cites the experience of Oslo I:
"In Oslo I there were noncommittal negotiations from 20 January to
20 May '93. We reached an understanding on a document which we
said did not obligate either party. On 20 May Uri Savir entered
the picture, and on June 10 Yoel Zinger. Then we reached another
document, in which some of the principles were retained and others
changed, and this isn't the place to be specific...There is a
certain similarity between the nature of the negotiations on the
final agreement and the negotiations on Oslo I."
So there we have it. The Palestinians agreed to negotiating with
Israel with the starting point that Israel already made major
additional concessions. Hirschfeld thinks there were some
friendly winks and nods from the Palestinians but concedes that
there is no telling which of these "principles" would end up being
changed in the formal talks.
Shimon Peres opposed going public with the "deal" before the
elections. His political instincts served him well.
Dr. Aaron Lerner, Associate
IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-904719/Fax 972-9-911645
INTERNET ADDRESS: im...@netvision.net.il
pager 03-6750750 subscriber 4811
To subscribe:
A) Regular subscription via Virtual Jerusalem
http://www.virtual.co.il/city_services/lists/imra-l
B) For free fax subscription, please send request to
im...@netvision.net.il
Fax service limited to: American area codes 212, 313, 503, 514
(Montreal), 541, 718, 813 (Tampa) as well as Athens(+30 1), Lisbon
(+351-1), Croatia (+385), Zagreb (+385-1), United Kingdom (+44),
Sweden (+46), Australia (+61 - Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney,
Darwin), Seoul (+82-2), Hong Kong (+852)