Location: Grand Park Hotel, Ramallah

MIFTAH Representative: Isra’ Muzaffar

Conference Structure:

Opening and Welcoming Remarks (Dr. Abdel Rahman Al-Tamimi, PNGO)

Session I: Political Implications of Unilateral Disengagement Plan

1. Representative of the PNA
2. Representative of Palestinian civil society (Dr. Azmi Al-Shu’aibi)
3. Representative of the Office of the Special Envoy for Disengagement (Ambassador William Taylor)
4. Discussion

Session II: Roles and Responsibilities of the International Community

1. Representative of the World Bank (Mr. Nigel Roberts)
2. Two Representatives of OCHA
3. Representative of an international NGO (Ms. Malin Greenhill)
4. Discussion

Session III: Role of Palestinian Civil Society During and After Disengagement

1. Representative of Palestinian civil society (Mr. Izzat Abdel Hadi, PNGO)
2. Discussion

Closing Remarks (Dr. Allam Jarrar, PNGO)

General Themes:

• The Unilateral Disengagement Plan necessitates both technical and political solutions

  Some speakers (e.g. Ambassador William Taylor) stressed technical issues because of their avowed concern about economic growth and trade. By contrast, proponents of the necessity of a political framework expressed their fear from the emergence of a “modernized occupation” (Dr. Azmi Al-Shu’aibi). On his part, Mr. Nigel Roberts of the World Bank emphasized both technical and political solutions; he affirmed that in order to enhance growth and development, donor assistance requires changes on the policy front, primarily the free movement of goods and people, followed by technical solutions.

• The Unilateral Disengagement Plan should not be only about security

  The Unilateral Disengagement Plan should be viewed not only from the perspective of creating a balance between economic development and security, as Ambassador Taylor averred, but also from a rights-based approach that seeks to provide sustainable solutions based on international humanitarian law and international human rights law (Ms Malin Greenhill). According to Ms. Greenhill, there needs to be concerted efforts to incorporate international humanitarian law in the political process (e.g. before, during, and after disengagement).

• The Unilateral Disengagement Plan should be part of the two-state solution

  The Unilateral Disengagement Plan should not be dissociated from the question of ending the occupation in Gaza and the West Bank, including east Jerusalem. It must, hence, be always analyzed and critiqued in accordance with international law and the various bi-lateral agreements between the Palestinian National Authority and Israel, most importantly the Road Map (Discussion). While Ambassdor Taylor asserted the continued commitment of the United States to the two-state solution and the importance of viewing the Unilateral Disengagement Plan as a step in the right direction, many conference participants (e.g. Dr. Allam Jarrar) expressed their fear that the Unilateral Disengagement Plan may preempt the fulfillment of this goal and further complicate the realities on the ground in the long run (e.g.: isolating Gaza, the wall in WB, isolating Jerusalem…etc).

• Palestinian Civil Society Needs to Raise Awareness about the Unilateral Disengagement Plan

  Palestinian civil society institutions need to play an advocacy role vis-à-vis the Palestinian public. In lieu of putting forth general solutions, the institutions should develop policies and strategies that guarantee security for Palestinian citizens, internal reconciliation among parties, and respect for the democratic process. Toward these ends, Palestinian civil society institutions should coordinate their efforts with the Palestinian National Authority in informing public opinion. Finally, as Mr. Izzat Abdel Hadi contended, dialogue among the PNA and civil society should allow for a serious discussion of the applicability of the Lebanese model in Gaza (i.e. a State + a resistance movement).