 |
 |
|
|
|
People Peace Initiative
PO Box 1951
Vail, CO 81658
USA
|
|
|
People Peace Initiative
A Grass-Roots Movement for Peace Between Israelis & Palestinians.
Tom Hopkins, Diana Buttu & Ilan Pappe. |
July 2004. The People Peace Initiative (PPI) was formed to formulate a comprehensive peace plan between the Israelis and Palestinians and then help
create the conditions necessary for its realization.
PPI is a grass-roots initiative. The principals are Tom Hopkins (Vail, Colorado), Ilan Pappe (Exeter, UK), and Diana Buttu (Ramallah, West Bank).
Ilan is an historian at the University of Exeter, he was formerly at the University of Haifa, and has authored many books on the early history of
Israel. He is one of the "new historians" who are going into the archives and rewriting the history of Israel, doing away with many of the myths.
Diana was, until December 2005, President Mahmoud Abbas' media representative and his legal adviser on the peace negotiations.
Tom is the
outsider who does not have a direct stake in the conflict - he could have sat on a jury - and the one with insight into the US situation that
we believe will largely determine the outcome.
|
|
Background to PPI's Approach.
PPI aims to provide a fresh start to a problem that has bedeviled the world since 1948. It grew out of frustration with the inability
of the Israeli and Palestinian peoples to make peace, the inability of the US to act as an honest broker, the inability of the Arab, Muslim and European
nations to make something happen, and the impotence of the UN, forced on it by the US. It is aimed at the people - Israelis Palestinians, Americans, Arabs,
Muslims, and Europeans - and at our leaders. If the people demand action, then our leaders will too.
|
|
Principles to PPI's Approach.
First, we see that this conflict is much bigger than itself. Israel is the West's thumb in the eye of the Arab and Muslim worlds. This conflict is
not just an issue between the Israelis and Palestinians; it is an issue that involves the Western, Arab and Islamic worlds. It is the conflict that
could reintroduce the use of nuclear weapons to the world; it will play a negative role in the coming contest between China, India, and the West over oil.
This conflict does not belong just to the Israelis and Palestinians - it involves us all and it behooves us to resolve it.
Second, we advocate a bottom-up process to augment a top-down process. We seek a grass-roots movement, especially in the US, to force our leaders to
overcome their special-interest constraints and lead us to peace.
Third, the battle that really counts, at least the one that could make a difference, is for US public opinion. Israel is subject to the US as it is
dependent on the US for continued financial help, arms, trade, and intervention in world bodies.
Fourth, we go back to 1948 when the die was cast. All the troubles since are the result of what happened in Israel's formative years... they were
foreseen with uncanny accuracy by then US Secretary of State, General George Marshall. The borders of 1967 are not the starting point, the assumption
underlying all the two-state proposals. The human rights violations that preceded these borders have to be addressed if we are to achieve peace.
|
The State of Abraham
Walking together
|
|
Fifth, at present there is not a viable solution... there can't be one viable solution, there will eitehr be two solutions or none. At present there is
none. The first possibility is the shared democracy in which Israel, Gaza and the West Bank become one state with citizenship and equal rights for Jews and
Palestinians. It would have a binational form in which the ethnic groups would have significant autonomy (allowing Jews to preserve the "Jewishness" of
their
living situation, and the Palestinians to avoid domination by the Jews), and it would have power-sharing so that the two major ethnic groups would
take turns at being in charge.
Paradoxically, if there is international support for the shared democracy, then we can develop a second viable alternative, the two-state solution. Only
if the shared democracy is creidble will the Israelis make the necessary concessions to make an independent Palestinian state a real alternative that could
result in peace. Two viable solutions or none!
Sixth, a new approach is required. For eighty-five years, since 1922, all attempts to enable the Jews and Palestinians to live together in peace have
failed, demonstrating that the approaches used to date are missing a key element. That missing element is the failure to realize that the conflict is not
yet ripe... that there is no "hurting stalemate" which is a necessary precondition to peacemaking. The Palestinians have been hurting for years and have
long given up on the idea that the Israelis could be driven out - they accept that Israelis are there to stay - but Israel is achieving its goals through
aggression, it is not hurting, and it is not yet ready for peace. There is no hurting stalemate. Until Israelis see a shared democracy or an independent
Palestinian state that has parity as being more attractive than the status quo - until their status quo is one of hurt - there will be no meaningful peace
negotiations. Once there is a hurting stalemate, a solution could be negotiated that achieves justice and power sharing or parity, and that
gives the Jews the security they have long desired and that frees the Palestinians to pursue a better future for themselves.
|
Tough Peace
This book, co-authored by Hopkins, Pappe, and Buttu, will be published by Pluto Press, London. It is scheduled for general release in 2009.
The co-editors present a broad, multi-faceted perspective. On this team Ilan Pappe is the Jew raised in a Judaistic tradition, Diana Buttu is the
Palestinian raised in a Muslim tradition, and Tom Hopkins is the Westerner (an Aussie) raised in a Christian tradition. The book will also have chapters
by other contributors.
Rave Reviews. Early drafts of the book and its centerpiece, the Necessary Steps to Peace, have been received by leading international
peacemakers with astonishment and excitement:
|
- "What I liked most about it was that it contained many innovative ideas and that the approach was justice, back to where it went wrong,
fresh start, reconciliation, and - above all - from below, not from the top down"
- "What really attracted me was to see the text,
the sound principles, - and my increasing surprise as I read on, to find all my various questions and doubts addressed in a reasonable and balanced way -
founded on sound, basic peace movement principles and approaches."
|
|
|
|
Send questions and comments to thopkins07@PeoplePeaceInitiative.org
This page last updated November 21, 2008.
© Copyright 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008 by People Peace Initiative. All rights reserved.
|
|
