 |
| Pâ•qidꞋ Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu |
2001.08.26 – I first introduced my “Concurrent Village Network” (CVN) model for peace between Israel and her neighbors, in the following letter to Member of K’nesset Uzi Landau (who was then my next-door neighbor) on 1988.03.09:
“Uzi,
“I developed a novel idea about a long–range solution in the territories (if we are not already committed) regarding which I would like your response and opinion. I think it is quite unlike anything done before and would require an open–minded approach to something new and unique.“The basic idea is to allow a somewhat natural, gradual, quiet and "unintentional" network of interlaced townships to develop.
“These townships could be gradually connected by guaranteed free access corridors and communications into two sets of "township networks" gradually obtaining their own autonomy.
“One obvious advantage would be that this would not develop a traditional country in the territories having borders around a large area and desirous of an army which is likely to present considerable security problems for us. Rather, the territories would consist of a "Swiss cheese autonomous country" interlaced with as well as adjoining Israel. (Present Israeli settlements in the present territories would be a similar "Swiss cheese" area of Israel.)
“Drawing up borders among these two sets of townships would be extremely time consuming—something I regard as an advantage rather than a disadvantage.
“This might suggest unilateral autonomy and rewards to towns & villages fitting the desired "township" town, granting them autonomy over the area surrounding their village as a township?”
I also mentioned it in passing as part of a short bio, in The Mensa International Journal that year.
Ever since, seemingly unaware of my prophetic suggestion, events have inexorably marched toward the realization this model.
“Expressing the view of many Palestinians, [Prof. Yazigh] Sayigh notes that the collapse of the PA would make little difference, in the sense that it never functioned as a proper governmental system. Fatah (the core of the PLO) has continued to be the locus of power, and with its potential disintegration into separate entities, Israel will be able to develop stable relationships with individual regions.
“’Somali-style disintegration,’ which has been predicted since Arafat set up his fiefdom in Gaza, is also possible…”
The last paragraph of my letter to MK Landau makes it child’s play to figure out that peace should be pursued separately according to the experience of individual “townships.”
It was, therefore, particularly satisfying to read in The Jerusalem Post that U.S. foreign policy strategists have finally figured out a small part of the “township” strategy of this model too.
“The US, the [senior US administration] official said, supports Israel’s idea of a ‘rolling cease-fire’ that would start in one part of Gaza and the West Bank and spread to the rest of the territories. Under the plan that will be pitched to Arafat, the PA would rein in militants in selected areas as Israel matches the measure by easing restrictions on the general Palestinian population.”
Clearly, they still haven’t quite figured out my CVN model. (Why don’t they save a lot of lives, on both sides, by just admitting they need to ask me?) The CVN model – and common sense – would suggest that each township (“part,” above) be rewarded or constricted according to the experience of that township – a stepped approach of establishing peace piece by piece; sort of a reversal of the 'Pizza Process'. Each individual area should be rewarded or punished as an independent protectorate based exclusively on its own peaceful, or hostile, relationship with Israel. Each area could then determine its own course and fate.
The CVN model also suggests, however, that the experience of any given township be judged rigorously according to the Mitchell and Tenet plans, not compromised as the US State Dept. is presently asking. Caving in to the Arabs, in no small measure at the behest of Clinton and the US State Dept., is one of the leading causes that has gotten us into this present mess of violence. Compromising means that violence works for the Arabs, which, in turn, means they will use it repeatedly. This is the cycle of violence that must be broken.
 |
|
 |