| SPECIAL PROJECTS | |
|
|
1994
Working Visits
| WORKING VISIT - ONE Date: January 29th-31st
1994. Background : From the 6th-8th November 1993 a conference was held at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem on the subject of "Relations between Europe and the Middle East." This was organised by the Hebrew University, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs & The International Support Committee of the Institute for European Studies at the Hebrew University. This conference was attended by Israeli, Palestinian and European academics and sponsored by Punchline which is a London based specialist consultancy service providing advice on political, business and commercial interests and facilitating contacts. At this Jerusalem conference Mr. Sergiu Celac, the Romanian Ambassador in the United Kingdom, approached the former Prime Minister of Egypt, Mr. Mustapha Khalil, the Israeli Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Yossi Beilin and Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi, President of the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs. The Romanian Ambassador suggested the convening of a similar seminar to be held in Bucharest, Romania on Central\Eastern European and Middle East Relations. He subsequently approached Chairman Arafat during his visit to London and received a positive endorsement for the seminar according to which preparation and consultation began. Financial support was given by the European Community and Punchline. Sinaia Seminar Participants : The Syrian participant Dr. Aziz Shukri, Dean of the School of Law at Damascus University, made last minute apologies for not being able to attend the seminar. The original Egyptian participant, Dr. Usama El Baz, had to attend the Davos, Switzerland meetings which coincided with the proposed seminar. His place was taken by Ambassador Othman from the Egyptian Foreign Ministry. Programme: The seminar consisted of four sessions held over a three day period. The first session was chaired by Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi, Palestine; the second by Kamel Abu Jaber, Jordan; the third by Professor Yair Hirschfeld, Israel and the fourth by Mr. Paul Clairet, European Community. In the first session, held on the 29th January, Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi chaired the session which he divided into three parts. Firstly, he called upon Ambassador Celac to brief the other participants on the background and preparation for this seminar stressing that the intention was to explore the views of all parties in a non-politically representational capacity. Secondly, he called upon Mircea Malita to provide a background of the Black Sea University which resulted from the Black Sea Association. Thirdly he requested all participants to speak candidly about their views on the following four points: a) Their countries current foreign policy and foreign relations. b) The idea of a dialogue between the six Middle eastern countries, (Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Israel) and the six Central and Eastern European Countries. (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria.) c) The Palestine-Israel Peace Process. d) Relations between the European Community and the six Central\Eastern European countries listed above. The session lasted for four hours and all participants raised a variety of ideas which became the cornerstone of subsequent dialogue for the duration of the seminar. Topics The four sessions covered the following topics: 1. "The Future of Relations of Central and Eastern Europe and the Middle East in the Perspective of the Middle East Peace Process." 2. "Challenges to Peace in the Middle East in the view of Present Situations." 3. "The Economic Projects of Reconstruction and Development in the Middle East and their International Dimension." 4. "Review and Evaluation of the Discussed Issues." Framework of Dialogue 1. The historic links between the six Central\Eastern European and six Middle Eastern countries mentioned above, and the Ottoman empire. 2. Security problems and the current position held by the six Central\Eastern European countries excluded from NATO and from trade and investment from the European Community similar to the Middle Eastern countries who are also not members of a security pact and fail to form an economic bloc. 3. Both groups are looking for open dialogue on nationalism and religion and more understanding among themselves generally. 4. The importance of brainstorming sessions in order to find solutions and build confidence was raised. 5. Opportunities for dialogue among the twelve countries involved in the seminar were seen in a variety of combinations-multilateral, involving the participation of all parties or bi\tri-lateral, involving effective combinations such as Israel and Syria. General Remarks One participant made the remark that World War II began in Dansk and was only finished a few months ago with the signing of a Polish\German joint security and economic treaty. Other participants raised the issue of the weak relations between the six Central\Eastern European countries saying that they are divided. Three see their future as part of the European Community and the other three are divided between Russia and Turkey and Austria. Another participant talked about the question of legitimacy and how this word is currently being interpreted as recognition and independence. The question of internal and external security and the necessity for a global perspective was emphasised. Three obvious areas on which security dialogue needs to focus can be seen as the Black Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea. Economic and cultural co-operation for Palestinians should address their needs to obtain a port, a passport and a flag without the terms and means being dictated by others. Their relations with others must be agreed in the context of discussion with Jordan, Egypt and as at the current talks in Paris with Israel. The idea of a free economy was raised and the process of institution building and what this means for Palestinians. The PISGA agenda and the need to obtain national authority in the transitional phase were emphasised as was the centrality of Jerusalem and the need to recognise Palestinian rights regarding Jerusalem which includes having a political\national address in an open city with two flags, two authorities and two municipalities. Pre-requisite to self determination is the freedom to decide their own economic idealogy and political security and make decisions on refugees. There was a lot of interest expressed by the six European countries in being a part of the multilateral talks. The changing attitudes in the new era were noted meaning co-operation and a realistic assessment of future aspirations, security needs and the right to choose. The question of Jerusalem which is not to be negotiated until the final stage does not neccessarily mean postponing dialogue among the parties concerned. With the assistance of a mediator dialogue between Palestine and Israel can take place as can dialogue between Palestine, Jordan and Israel. The idea of a Black Sea Economic Co-operative was discussed and the possiblities for co-operation between Turkey and Romania. There was no appropriate model on which to base an alliance of this kind and no economic support such as in the EC. The idea that a forum for education and joint projects between the countries participating in the seminar received a lot of support, and it was suggested that the EC could serve as an interpolitical decision maker to fund and encourage initiatives such as these. Exchange of information and personnel from Universities and research centres before conflicts were resolved could provide vital groundwork, particularly on issues like water and energy. Multilateral talks on energy, water, refugees, arms control and the environment and the possiblity of inviting the six Central\Eastern European countries to join and contribute to the success of these talks and to provide a forum for dialogue among the six Middle Eastern countries was raised. The European Community will continue to contribute to the progression of the Middle East Peace Process and therefore to any initiative which goes toward achieving this end. The EC is interested in the planning and facilitating of any efforts at co-operation or dialogue between the countries involved in the seminar, be it bi-lateral, tri-lateral or multi lateral. There is no current "agenda" concerning political, economic or security issues for the six Central\Eastern European countries and with the continuously changing global scene it is difficult to initiate one at this point. Joint Challenges a) Israel to become a citizen of the Middle East. b) The Middle East to achieve a comprehensive Peace Settlement. c) Palestinians to exercise self determination and build an independent state. d) Eastern European countries to participate in the Peace Process, to end their isolation and to converge their diverse aspirations and priorities. e) To achieve a balance between National aspirations vs. Regional co-operation and regional co-operation vs. diversity of economic agendas and internal problems of the countries in the region. f) To find a mediator who can provide the necessary atmosphere, place and agenda to promote dialogue among all parties. Recommendations a) Meeting of the six Middle Eastern countries. This would lead to political exchange, (political messages) show goodwill and delineate the possibilities for future action. The precedent of this conference should be followed even if topics are repeated. This also gives the opportunity for bi\tri lateral contact. b) Meetings between the six countries of Central\Eastern Europe and the six countries of the Middle East. The Black Sea community and Middle Eastern Community to become partners in peace, co-operation, construction and development. Strategic and Security concerns to be addressed cover the Association of the Black Sea countries to the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. c) Meetings between the twelve countries and the European Community. The European Community could provide a follow-up programme to ensure stability based on cultural and economical co-operation. An attempt should be made to consider the agenda of the United States in such a framework and if Central\Eastern European countries emerge as an association of complementary or equal partners or as a buffer between Western Europe and Russia. d) Romanian initiative to follow up the dialogue among these countries particularly in searching for a political strategic agenda for the six Central\Eastern European countries and taking democracy, human rights, minority rights and the associated factors of religion, history and geography into consideration. Political meetings The President of Romania received all parties at the Presidential palace in Bucharest on the 31st January where he thanked them for their efforts and confirmed the Romanian interest in the topics discussed in the seminar. Topics raised were: Romanian involvement in the Palestinians future as a independent nation and to assist in construction plans for Jericho and Gaza. Romanian interest in joining the Peace Process through the multilateral talks. Romania's special relationship with Turkey. The presence of 400,000 Romanians in Israel. The Romanian President also received Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi at the Presidential Palace on 31 January 1994 in Bucharest for a meeting in which the following was discussed. I. Eastern Europe 1) Romania continuing the initiative of the dialogue between the twelve countries. 2) Romania will encourage the six Central\Eastern European countries to invite ministers to work on changing the image of the Warsaw Pact as the world moves towards changing to an economic political entity. 3) Romania will gauge the reactions of London, Bruxelles, Washington and Moscow to the above suggestion. 4) The relationship between Turkey and Romania should not decline at the expense of developing the future role of the six countries, therefore a seminar on Strategy and Security between the Black Sea Association and the six countries should be held which also involves the six Middle Eastern countries. Iraq would join such a seminar in the future. Romania should be allowed to conduct construction projects in the region as an element of compensation for previous Romanian losses in Iraq in terms of equipment and material. II. The Middle East. 1) The missed opportunity for dialogue among the six Middle Eastern countries due to the withdrawal of Syria should not affect the determination with which future dialogue should be pursued and Syria should be continuously invited. 2) Romania has a continuous commitment to bring all parties of the Middle East to a better understanding and host more meetings among them. Specific issues such as security, borders, arms, exits, Jerusalem and refugees could be discussed as could joint economic ventures on the Dead Sea. 3) This could be achieved in stages beginning with the six Middle Eastern countries, then perhaps Jordan\Israel\Palestine and then bi-laterally with Israel and Syria. There are already channels for dialogue between Jordan\Israel\Palestine. III. Bi-lateral Relations. 1) On Romanian\Palestinian relations the Romanian President emphasised that he had made several invitations to Chairman Arafat and sent a special delegation to Oslo on the eve of the funeral of Jurgen Holst. An official visit has so far been postponed but it is hoped that it will occur before the 10th of February which is the beginning of Ramadan. 2) Romania has a strong interest in assisting Palestinians in building houses, roads, factories and making priority equipment and material available to the Palestinian National Authority for Gaza and Jericho, through the Romanian government or through Romanian companies. 3) Exchange programmes at all institutional levels are encouraged with the political and financial support of the EC. 4) Romania showed its interest in joining the multilateral talks and would encourage Palestinians to invite Romania and others as participants in the multi-lateral talks on refugees. Reference was also made to programmes on rehabilitation\training\education and re-housing in the whole region. 5) The Romanian President mentioned that he had received Mr. Faisal Husseini and was glad to meet Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi. He expressed his hope that Chairman Arafat will continue to delegate Palestinians to maintain contact with Bucharest. Meeting with the Foreign Minister At the invitation of the Romanian Foreign Minister, Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi met at the Romainian Foreign Ministry in Bucharest on the 1st Febrary 1994 in the presence of the undersecretary of the Foreign Ministry, to follow up on topics discussed with the Romanian President on the previous day. They confirmed an understanding on the following points: 1. Preparation for a second seminar for the six Central\Eastern European countries and the six Middle Eastern countries with an emphasis on: a.) Calibre of the participants should be considered and it is wise that they should be close to decision makers and their respective capitals. b.) Romanian envoy to travel to Damascus, Amman, Tunis and Tel Aviv to convey the results of this seminar. c.) Continuous co-ordination and contact with the Palestinian leadership on these matters. 2. a.) Preparation for a special seminar on Strategy and Security among the six Middle Eastern and Association of the Black Sea countries to be held in Romania in the future. b.) Romania will continue to play the role of facilitator for dialogue among the six Middle Eastern countries in Bi\tri\multi-lateral format and provide all facilities for its success. c.) The Foreign Ministry will delegate a Romanian Ambassador to follow up on contacts. |