Barghouti's Peace Proposal

(See here) an MSNBC Newsweek article by Christopher Dickey that discusses the proposed negotiating stance of imprisoned Palestinian leaders such as Fatah member Marwan Barghouti and Hamas member Abdel Khaleq Natche.

While the prisoners' proposal is certainly a step in the right direction, it is important to note that even Hamas "moderates" who have expressed an interest in the proposal have indicated that any peace agreed to as a result would only represent a temporary hudna and that they would not give up on their dream of liberating all of that which they consider to be Palestine. My understanding is that they do not draw the line at 1967 borders as that which they consider Palestine.

While I personally have problems with the position stated in the proposal as to what the proposal indicates the Palestinian side would agree to, I agree with Christopher that this could serve as a starting point for negotiations. While I would consider some of the conditions of the proposal unreasonable, I also feel that the Israeli position, as put forth by Israeli PM Olmert is also unreasonable.

Personally, I feel any "fair and just" peace agreement is going to have to look something like the Geneva Accord. If either (or both) side(s) enter into negotiations and point to the other side as being unreasonable and the differences unsolvable, I am going to end up pointing at the Geneva Accord as proof the differences can be solved. Must the final result be a mirror image of the Geneva Accord? No it need not. The Geneva Accord only serves as proof that no difference can not be resolved.

If Mahmoud Abbas feels he can circumvent Hamas opposition to negotiations through a national referendum, at a minimum it must be clear in the referendum that if the Palestinian People vote for this position then any outcome would represent a permanent and lasting peace, and not a temporary hudna.