1. Eyeing Success, Avoiding Failure: Recommendations Ahead of Summit
2. Rice Redux: Key Statements on Int’l Meeting During October Mideast Trip
3. Jerusalem News: Debate on the City’s Future and Actions on the Ground Ahead of Summit
4. Humanitarian Outlook: U.S. Emergency Aid Request for Palestinians Comes as Situation in West Bank/Gaza Deteriorates
5. Focus on Palestinian Christians: Sec. Rice Visits Bethlehem; Community Struggles Amidst Extremism and Security Measures

==============================================================

As November begins, there are still questions of when the Annapolis meeting will take place, who will be there and what they will be talking about.  Some even wonder whether it will happen at all, but with December 21^st being the official end of fall, there is still time for diplomacy and dialogue to prepare the ground for the summit.  While sage observers of Middle East peacemaking are wont to be “optimistic” about prospects for a reinvigorated peace process, there is recognition of a real opportunity for progress toward a two-state solution and the urgent need to ensure a positive outcome from the conference in Maryland.  Political weakness of the players combined with an increasingly unstable regional situation complicates prospects, but also creates an unmistakable imperative and urgent motivation for making progress toward an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. 

The necessity of success and avoidance of failure are clear: dashed hopes could too easily ignite a new eruption of violence that would strengthen extremist elements at the expense of supporters of peace.  Secretary Rice is receiving almost daily advice regarding her preparations and how best to ensure that the fall meeting is not merely a “photo-op” as she has consistently emphasized it will not be.  The parties to the talks, the scope of the document they will agree to, the substance of the discussions themselves, the immediate steps that should be implemented, and the follow-up that must take place are the main issues around which suggestions and speculation turn.  Below are some of the key recommendations—from elected officials, U.S., Israeli and Palestinian leaders and experts, and organizations committed to the peace process— that have emerged in the past weeks outlining steps that the United States can take to make the most of the Annapolis meeting. 

1.    EYEING SUCCESS, AVOIDING FAILURE: RECOMMENDATIONS AHEAD OF SUMMIT   

“We are writing to both commend you for your efforts to reinvigorate the Israeli-Palestinian peace process by convening an international meeting this fall and to respectfully suggest that additional measures by the United States in the near term will be necessary to preserve the possibility of success.  As do you, we believe the coming months represent a critical opportunity to stabilize the region by advancing a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians…However, it is equally clear that a still-born initiative could set back prospects for peace…Clearly, robust, hands-on U.S. leadership and diplomacy is necessary to frame not only on what transpires at the meeting, but on what takes place before and after it. But dialogue and encouragement of the parties will not, by themselves, be sufficient…Accordingly, we urge you to consider a reorientation of U.S. project-focused assistance programs…U.S. assistance should be used-and should be designed to leverage international support-for financial and personnel reforms in the Palestinian Authority, for housing or other labor intensive projects, for the effective operation of a Palestinian police force and an independent Palestinian judiciary, and for long-term economic development and job creation programs. Addressing corruption and public safety in the P.A. while continuing to engage with Israel to coordinate a remittance schedule for Palestinian tax monies and to improve access and movement will ensure that assistance will be effective in reviving the Palestinian economy….Madam Secretary, resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, through the establishment of two states for two peoples, is too important not to seize the opportunities that have emerged over the past weeks…We look forward to working with you to ensure that it is a success.”  

Full letter >

“Bipartisan Foreign Policy Leaders’ Letter to President Bush on Annapolis Conference”, Signatories: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Lee H. Hamilton, Carla Hills, Nancy Kassebaum-Baker, Thomas R. Pickering, Brent Scowcroft, Theodore C. Sorensen, Paul Volcker, Joint Project of the U.S./Middle East Project, International Crisis Group and the New America Foundation, October 16, 2007

“We are writing to share with you a statement on the forthcoming Middle East peace conference adopted by the above-named organizations, whose contents we strongly endorse:  The Israeli-Palestinian peace conference announced by President Bush and scheduled for November presents a genuine opportunity for progress toward a two-state solution. The Middle East remains mired in its worst crisis in years, and a positive outcome of the conference could play a critical role in stemming the rising tide of instability and violence. Because failure risks devastating consequences in the region and beyond, it is critically important that the conference succeed…we believe that in order to be successful, the outcome of the conference must be substantive, inclusive and relevant to the daily lives of Israelis and Palestinians…These three elements are closely interconnected; one cannot occur in the absence of the others. Unless the conference yields substantive results on permanent status, neither side will have the motivation or public support to take difficult steps on the ground. If Syria or Hamas are ostracized, prospects that they will play a spoiler role increase dramatically…And unless both sides see concrete improvements in their lives, political agreements are likely to be dismissed as mere rhetoric, further undercutting support for a two-state solution….”                    Full statement >

“Middle East Summit: A Recipe For Failure?”, Daniel Kurtzer, International Herald Tribune,  October 9, 2007

“As diplomats scramble to piece together the parts of the Middle East peace meeting that the United States is determined to convene in November, one crucial question is getting too little attention: How will success be measured?...Previous Middle East conferences have risen or fallen on this question, and thus it is important to assess what an international meeting at this time could achieve in the Arab-Israeli peace process. Four outcomes could very well determine success….First, the meeting needs to articulate the goal of the peace process and the process for reaching that goal. The goal is to reach an end of the Arab-Israeli conflict….Second, the meeting needs to take a stance on the most critical behavioral issues in the conflict…Third, the meeting must yield agreement on the principles that will inform the bilateral negotiations on final status….Finally, the meeting must establish a realistic timetable for negotiations and milestones for measuring whether the parties are moving toward meeting the timetable….The alternative to aiming for these outcomes is a failed meeting. There is no benefit - and great danger - in convening a meeting with limited goals and no follow-up…Thus, it behooves the Bush administration to set the bar high for this meeting and to establish serious goals that ensure success.”                                                                                           Full article >

“Peace How?”, A Forum on Mideast Diplomacy With Yossi Beilin, Daoud Kuttab, Aaron David Miller, Khalil Shikaki and Ephraim Sneh, In The Jewish Daily Forward , October 3, 2007  

“Following a tumultuous year, in which Hamas seized control of Gaza, we are now seeing a flurry of diplomatic activity aimed at advancing peace between Israelis and Palestinians. With an American-backed international conference scheduled for November, Palestinians and Israelis have stepped up their own bilateral diplomacy.  Some say the time is ripe for a dramatic diplomatic breakthrough. Others see this as wishful thinking.  What can be achieved through diplomacy at this juncture? Is the time ripe for a grand Israeli-Palestinian accord? Or should the parties’ aims be more modest? How can Israelis, Palestinians and the international community best take advantage of the present situation? And what pitfalls lay ahead?  The Forward posed these questions to a group of Israeli, Palestinian and American experts…”                                                                          Full article >

“Defining Success: The Fall Mid-East Meeting”, Analysis and Recommendations on Palestine Policy from the American Task Force on Palestine, October 2, 2007  

“Like any complex diplomatic event, the upcoming Fall meeting should integrate a number of threads. In addition to an agreed document, it should unveil a credible follow-up process, develop the regional dimension in terms of Arab involvement in the peace process, and produce deliverables that ground any diplomatic outcome in reality. Defining the success of the meeting based on only one of these elements will turn it into an all-or-nothing event, maximizing chances of failure and giving its opponents ample opportunity to unrealistically define expectations. The US role in defining and ensuring success is indispensable. It must design and time its role –whether substantively or in terms of process – cautiously to ensure maximum effectiveness…”                                                                                                                                                              Full article >

“A Guide to a Successful November International Conference”, Israel Policy Forum Paper, Ambs. Thomas Pickering, Samuel Lewis, Edward Walker, Robert Pelletreau and Frederic Hof, September 26, 2007

“The November conference can provide a focal point, and to some extent a deadline, for initial progress... The ultimate aim of course should be an Arab-Israeli settlement based on UN Resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), and 1515 (2003); the Madrid Principles; the Arab Peace Initiative, and the Road Map.  Despite these positive objectives, there are serious challenges. Expectations in the region have been raised, and many are hoping for a significant political breakthrough.  At the same time, the criteria for success are vague and the perceptions of the various players and potential players differ widely. The meeting as it stands now seems to be something of a gamble. If it fails, resulting in disappointment and disillusionment, it could further set back the situation in the Middle East…The following recommendations are designed to mitigate the chances of failure and to enhance the prospects of a successful international conference. We define success as an outcome that creates the momentum for continued progress and movement toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…”             Full paper >

2. RICE REDUX: KEY STATEMENTS ON INT'L MEETING DURING OCTOBER MIDEAST TRIP 

Below is a compilation of key statements related to the upcoming international meeting made by Secretary of State Rice during her trip to the Middle East from October 14-18^th that included Israel and the Palestinian territories, Egypt and Jordan.  All of Sec. Rice’s comments during her trip, can be viewed here. Upon return from her trip, on Oct 23^rd, Sec. Rice testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, giving assurance that the meeting will indeed be convened and talking about the urgency of these current peace efforts, “"Our concern is growing that without a serious political prospect for the Palestinians that gives to moderate leaders a horizon that they can show to their people that indeed there is a two-state solution that is possible, we will lose the window for a two-state solution.”  Sec. Rice is expected to travel to the region again later this week.       

On the seriousness of these efforts: “This trip was important to get a sense of where the parties are, to have a chance to see what needs to be done to help them achieve what they're trying to achieve. Obviously, this is the beginning of a process and it’s the most serious process that they've had in some time....The teams are serious, the people are serious, the issues are serious. And so I'm not surprised that there are some tensions. I'm not surprised that there are some ups and downs. That's the character of this kind of endeavor. But I was encouraged by what I heard..." In briefing en route London, England, October 18, 2007

On the Issues to be Discussed: “…I think I just heard the Foreign Minister [Tzipi Livni] say that she was going to explore all of the outstanding issues between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Now, the process on which we are embarked is to lead to the creation of a Palestinian state. There are many issues that have to be resolved to lead to the creation of a Palestinian state, including the core issues. But we're at the beginning of a process. And what we are going to do is to help the parties when needed…The meeting that will take place in November is to give support to the bilateral discussions of the issues that must be resolved before there is a -- the establishment of a Palestinian state. And we've been very clear that this process has to address core issues…”  In Press Conference with Israeli FM Tzipi Livni, Jerusalem, Oct 17, 2007

On the date: “Well, first of all, we have not set a date for the meeting, so it's a little hard to postpone something for which you haven't set a date. But I think that we believe that the timeframe in which we are working is the one that the President announced, which is that we will have a meeting this fall and I would note that there are only two months left in fall -- that's November and December -- so we're working very urgently toward getting to that meeting.”  In press conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit, Cairo, Egypt, October 16, 2007

On the invitation list:  “… We are inviting the members of the Arab League Follow-up Committee, and Syria is, of course, a member of the Arab League Follow-up Committee. It's of course, up to Syria whether it wishes to engage in this meeting. But the meeting is about the Israelis and Palestinians although, obviously, we need to have a comprehensive peace.”  Interview With Ayala Hasson, Channel 1, Jerusalem, October 15, 2007

On the agenda: “Well, first let me say, there is a clear agenda, and that is to work on an international basis to support the efforts of Palestinians and Israelis to end their conflict. That's the very clear agenda. We know that that requires the addressing of a number of issues that -- core issues -- that must be resolved ultimately if there is to be a Palestinian state. We know that that must involve looking to improve the lives of Palestinians economically, to improve the lives of the Palestinians in terms of movement and access.  We know, too, that it requires the support of regional states and the support of the international community, so there is an agenda….And I just want to repeat what the President said in an interview that he recently gave to Al Arabiya, which is that this is going to be a serious and substantive conference that will advance the cause of the establishment of a Palestinian state. We, frankly, have better things to do than invite people to Annapolis for a photo op...”  In press conference with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Ramallah, West Bank, October 15, 2007

On the document: “A document does not have to be detailed in order to be serious. It doesn't have to be detailed in order to be substantive. I think everybody understands that if it is going to address the establishment of a Palestinian state then it has to address core issues…They're not going to be able to come to answers about issues that have been on the table for decades in a short document that they're preparing for an international meeting.  But both have signaled to me that they want to have this document signal that they agree that there is a basis to move forward for the establishment of a Palestinian state. And that's really what I mean by serious and substantive, not that it has to be detailed in any way…I don't think we are really talking about a kind of classic framework agreement where everything gets worked out in equal measure to be the basis on which you then go and negotiate details, but you do need to have enough that is concrete so that people know that we are not just starting out with general principle everybody would like to have a Palestinian state. They are both committed to that.” Interview with Roundtable with Traveling Press, Jerusalem, October 15, 2007

On the basis for talks: “…a lot has happened between 2001 and now to get us to the point at which we find ourselves. We are operating, by the way, on the basis of a number of documents that have been created during this period of time -- the roadmap, for instance, the President's two-state solution being enshrined in that roadmap; the Arab peace initiative. These are all efforts and initiatives and documents that have been created over the last several years and that now give us part of the foundation for moving forward on the Palestinian-Israeli front…” In press conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit, Cairo, Egypt, October 16, 2007

On the Administration’s commitment:  “In terms of the Administration's dedication to this issue, you know we didn't start yesterday trying to move this issue forward. We didn't even start in January when I talked about the importance of this to the President in his last several months in office. But this goes back a long way. It goes back to the President's first annunciation of the two-state solution…Now, I think because of all that has been done over the last five, six years, including I think the fact that this President has established with both Israelis and Palestinians that he understands the importance of a two-state solution, he also understands that a two-state solution has to lead to greater security and not to less.” Interview with Roundtable with Traveling Press, Jerusalem, October 15, 2007

On success: “…And I think we will succeed. Yes, I'm an optimist. History takes funny turns. And as I said earlier, there are many things that are harder about the process now than before, but there are many things that are changed...There's a lot of hard work to do, too. And I would be the last to say that that work is done. We are beginning a process, not ending it. But I really do believe that if everybody exercises their responsibilities this time, we are going to find ourselves in a new world, a world in which there will be no doubt about the establishment of a Palestinian state, a state that the time really is now to try to achieve that, because the Palestinians have waited too long for the dignity that's going to come from their own state and the Israelis have waited too long for the security that is going to come from a democratic state that is fighting terror and delivering for its own people.  Interview with Nihal Saad of Nile Television, October 16, 2007

 3. JERUSALEM NEWS: DEBATE ON THE CITY'S FUTURE AND ACTIONS ON THE GROUND AHEAD OF SUMMIT

As the summit nears, debate on Jerusalem—a key final status issue—grows.  What will the city look like in the future?  Will it be divided, split, united, shared?  Some are proposing compromises while others have set out maximalist positions, evidence of the seriousness with which the current push for peace is being viewed.  This debate is laying the groundwork for a solution that can reflect the religious, political and cultural claims of Israelis and Palestinians and of Jews, Christians and Muslims.  A mutually agreed-upon resolution is consistent with long-standing U.S. policy that the city’s status must be determined through negotiations and that no actions should be taken by either party to prejudge those negotiations. While there are challenges to achieving a solution for Jerusalem—both in rhetoric and in real actions on the ground—it is also clear that a negotiated resolution is both possible and essential.  As Israeli expert on Jerusalem, Daniel Seidemann, wrote in a recent article, “Seriously addressing the political future of Jerusalem and creating the ‘Jerusalem paradigm’--where civilizations don't clash, but meet--may well contribute to the Annapolis ‘event’ becoming the turning point that the parties, the region and the world so desperately need.” 

● Debate on the City’s Future

“Jerusalem: 'Sharing' Not 'Dividing'”, M.J. Rosenberg, IPF Friday, Issue #340, Israel Policy Forum, October 19, 2007

“Here is the only thing you need to know about Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s plan to divide Jerusalem: there is no such plan. There never was one and it is safe to say that there will never be one.  Nor is there a plan by any other Israeli leader to divide Jerusalem. Additionally, neither Mahmoud Abbas nor the Palestinian Authority he heads favors the division of Jerusalem.  From Olmert to Ramon to Beilin to Abbas and Fayyad, there is not a single proposal to divide the city…What is being discussed is the formulation President Bill Clinton devised in 2001. ‘First, Jerusalem should be an open and undivided city, with assured freedom of access and worship for all. It should encompass the internationally recognized capitals of two states, Israel and Palestine…Second, what is Arab should be Palestinian…Third, what is Jewish should be Israeli. Fourth, what is holy to both requires a special care to meet the needs of all. No peace agreement will last if not premised on mutual respect for the religious beliefs and holy shrines of Jews, Muslims and Christians.’  The Clinton language is the full-blown version of the ideas Israelis and Palestinians have been discussing. Not only does it not call for Jerusalem’s division, it specifically rules it out…The issue is ‘sharing’ Jerusalem. Are Israelis and Palestinians willing to share the city? Polls show that a majority in each camp is. Those majorities do not favor erecting physical walls to divide Jerusalem but rather setting up a legal framework which preserves physical unity of the city while sharing sovereignty.  That wouldn’t divide Jerusalem; it would re-establish its unity….”             Full article >

“Talk Grows In Israel About Splitting Jerusalem”, Nathan Guttman, The Jewish Daily Forward
October 10, 2007

“Jerusalem, the perennially divided city, is again becoming a central point of contention as Israelis and Palestinians prepare for the first serious peace discussions in years.  Last Monday, one of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s closest allies, Haim Ramon, brought the issue into the open when he suggested in an interview that Israel would be willing to cede some parts of Jerusalem to the Palestinians.  Ramon’s move inflamed hawkish Jewish activists in Israel and America, but it comes after months of behind-the-scenes activity…‘I agree that all the Palestinian neighborhoods except the Arab neighborhoods in the holy basin would be transferred’ to Palestinians, Ramon said in a radio interview. The remark was the boldest public statement by an Israeli leader about the future of Jerusalem since the government of Israeli minister of defense Ehud Barak broached the issue in the 2000 Camp David summit.  Ramon’s remarks come as Israel is preparing for a peace conference set to take place next month in Annapolis, Md. Jerusalem is one of a few of what are known as final-status issues that have come up in all past peace talks. Israel has resisted directing the November conference at final-status issues, but Ramon’s comments suggest this may be changing…”                                                                                                                                                              Full article >

“Jerusalem Emerges as Stumbling Block in Mideast Peace Talks”, Robert Berger, Voice of America, October 11, 2007

“Jerusalem is emerging as a major stumbling block in new peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.  As Robert Berger reports from VOA's Jerusalem bureau, both Jews and Muslims are claiming the city's holy sites as their own.  A senior Palestinian official has thrown a wrench into peace talks by saying that the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City, the holiest place in Judaism, belongs to Islam and the Palestinians.  The Palestinian Minister for Jerusalem Affairs Adnan Husseini says the Western Wall is a ‘Wakf’ or Islamic Trust that must be returned to Palestinian control.  He told Israel Radio that it is a supporting wall for the al-Aksa Mosque, the third holiest place in Islam…As Israel and the Palestinians try to hammer out a declaration of principles to be presented at an international peace conference this year, Jerusalem is back on the negotiating table. In a compromise proposal earlier this week, Israel offered to hand over some Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem to Palestinian control, though that would not include the Old City, where contested holy sites are located. Israeli parliamentarian Reuven Rivlin, of the hawkish opposition Likud party, says the government made a mistake by negotiating on Jerusalem in the first place.   Rivlin told Israel Radio that if you begin by offering Arab neighborhoods to the Palestinians then you end at the Western Wall.  He said no Israeli leader has the right to negotiate over Jerusalem, which he says is the eternal capital of the Jewish people…”                                                                                                                                                           Full article >

Also See: “Annapolis and Jerusalem”, Bitterlemons (Israeli-Palestinian Crossfire), Edition 39, October 29, 2007

Two Palestinian Views: “Jerusalem embodies the conflict”, Ghassan Khatib, “A closed file”, an interview with Adnan Husseini; Two Israeli Views: “Jerusalem won't be resolved at Annapolis”, Yossi Alpher, “Creating the ‘Jerusalem paradigm’”, Daniel Seidemann                                                                                                                                                                    Full articles >

● On the Ground in Jerusalem: Actions Undermine Negotiations 

“Israel takes land to ease way to build in E-1 area”, Avika Eldar, Haaretz, October 9, 2007

“The Israel Defense Forces recently issued an order expropriating over 1,100 dunams of land from four Arab villages located between East Jerusalem and the West Bank settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim.  The land is slated to be used for a new Palestinian road that would connect East Jerusalem with Jericho. That in turn would "free up" the E-1 area between Jerusalem and Ma'aleh Adumim - through which the current Jerusalem-Jericho road runs - for a long-planned Jewish development consisting of 3,500 apartments and an industrial park.  The Palestinians and the international community, including the United States, have long objected to the E-1 plan on the grounds that it would cut the West Bank in two and sever East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank….”                                                                                                                                  Full article >

“Highlights of press conference by UN Under-Secretary-General John Holmes on humanitarian situation in Occupied Palestinian Territory”, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), October 25, 2007

“Report: Palestinian Economy Deteriorates”, Mark Lavie, Associated Press, September 18, 2007

“…The report marks two years since donors pledged hundreds of millions of dollars at a conference in London and made plans to rehabilitate the Palestinian economy. In 2006, donor assistance reached a record $1.4 billion, the report said. It pleads for further efforts by donors, while acknowledging that economic development projects in unstable political conditions are risky.  The World Bank points to a dropping gross domestic product as evidence of the economic deterioration. After reaching $1,612 in 1999, the GDP per capita dropped to $1,129 in 2006. ‘More troubling than the negative growth rates over the past few years is the changing composition of the economy’ — the shrinking private sector and expanding public sector, the report said…The report said that economic development must proceed despite ongoing strife, though ‘parallel actions in a situation of conflict and political uncertainty are risky and politically costly.’…”                                                                                                Full article >

“Two Years after London: Restarting Palestinian Economic Recovery”, Economic Monitoring Report to the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee, World Bank Group, Sept. 24, 2007

The report, a product of two months of intensive consultations with a wide spectrum of Palestinian, Israeli and international officials and agencies, warns against partial and unilateral solutions to the Palestinian economic crisis, calling instead for comprehensive and parallel policies, which address the fundamental preconditions for economic recovery. 

“…The viability of the PA is a precondition for a lasting recovery and peace. For the PA to be viable, it must restore law and order and become fiscally self-sufficient. Continued donor investment in and through PA institutions must be based on economic considerations and bolster a commitment by the Government to the reforms noted in this report, not be conditioned on it. Similarly, the PA’s reform agenda must clearly and realistically reflect a finite horizon of aid dependency…The good news is that all sides are aware of what is needed. The less positive news is that this involves much financial and political capital. The precondition for success is that parallel actions must be taken by all sides to trigger a virtuous cycle of growth and peace…The success of Palestinian reform and political stability relies on immediate and free movement and access, a healthy private sector, and predictable donor assistance. The impact of donor assistance depends on critical PA reforms. Israel’s facilitation of Palestinian movement requires realistic assurances of law and order. Another precondition relates to the situation in Gaza, without which a discussion of Palestinian restoration would at best be incomplete if not temporary…”                                   Full Report >

5. FOCUS ON PALESTINIAN CHRISTIANS: SEC. RICE VISITS BETHLEHEM; COMMUNITY STRUGGLES AMIDST EXTREMISM AND SECURITY MEASURES

During her October Middle East trip, Sec. Rice visited Bethlehem, including the Church of the Nativity, believed to be the site of Jesus’ birth.  During her trip she also met with an interfaith group of religious leaders, including Christian leaders.  Historically, the Bethlehem district has been predominantly Christian, but due to the conflict and economic malaise, particularly acute in this area because of the route of the separation barrier, Bethlehem’s Christians are increasingly leaving.  Below is a statement Sec. Rice made in Bethlehem and an article highlighting this historic visit. 

“Remarks with Palestinian Minister of Women's Affairs and Tourism Kholoud Daybis At the Church of the Nativity”, Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Bethlehem, Jerusalem, October 17, 2007

“…We have a few words that we would like to say about the Church…I'd just like to make first a personal reflection that being here at the birthplace of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has been a very special and moving experience. I was saying earlier that I think I could spell Bethlehem before I could spell my name because I -- was so often in the stories that children follow to learn about the life of Jesus Christ, and it all started here in Bethlehem. It is also, I think, personally for me a reminder that the Prince of Peace is still with us and still with me and with all of us, but that also these great monotheistic religions that have inhabited this land together have an opportunity to overcome differences, to put aside grievances, to make the power of religion a power of healing and a power of reconciliation rather than a power of division. And that is what these great holy sites remind us of is that the three great religions indeed share a common vision of peace and a common vision of our humanity. And that is what I ultimately take away from this trip. Thank you so much.”                                                                                         Full remarks >

“Rice Visits Jesus' Birth Place”, Dalia Nammari, Associated Press, October 17, 2007

“Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a devout Christian, visited Jesus' traditional birthplace Wednesday in a symbolic bid to urge Israel and the Palestinians to move quickly to resume formal peace negotiations…Her day began in biblical Bethlehem in the West Bank, with a tour of the Church of the Nativity, built over Jesus' traditional birth grotto. In the grotto, she lit a candle and paused for prayer…Rice has said her visit to Bethlehem is part of an attempt to assure ordinary people that the U.S. is serious about helping them reach peace.  After her tour of the church, she met with civic leaders and local security chiefs, who told her about the daily difficulties of life under Israeli occupation.  Bethlehem, just south of Jerusalem, is lined on two sides by Israel's West Bank separation barrier, along some stretches a towering wall of cement blocks.  Town residents need difficult-to-obtain permits to cross through a wall terminal into Jerusalem, and long lines often form during rush hour…. Palestinians who met with Rice said they told her about the disruptions caused by Israeli army checkpoints crisscrossing the West Bank, but also emphasized they are ready for a peace deal, said Palestinian Cabinet minister Ziad Bandak who joined the group…”      Full article >

● Palestinian Christians Struggle Amidst Extremism and Security Measures

Palestinian Christians, a small minority in the Palestinian community, have been increasingly emigrating due primarily to the ongoing conflict and dire economic situation.  In recent weeks, the killing of a Palestinian Christian in Gaza by an Islamic extremist group has placed added pressures on a struggling community that generally enjoys good relations with its Muslim neighbors, but is disproportionately affected by the absence of rule of law.   In addition, increased Israeli security measures, such as the rescinding of travel visas for Christian Arab clergy, are making the practice of worship for Palestinian Christians even more difficult.

“Church Leaders Condemn the Killing of a Palestinian Christian in Gaza”, Jerusalem Inter-Church Centre, October 9, 2007

“As leaders of the Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical (Lutheran and Anglican) Churches, we condemn with deep sorrow the deliberate murder of Mr. Rami Ayyad.  Mr. Ayyad, a Christian, used to work at the Palestinian Bible Society bookshop which was burned six weeks ago by unidentified gunmen.  This tragic incident is the first of its kind.  We appreciate the Islamic, and National leaderships that joined us in condemning this terrible crime.  At the same time, we remind all to continue to pay serious attention to the overwhelming daily escalation of human rights' abuses that hurts the whole Palestinian Society, both Muslims and Christians. We call on all to unite as one and resist this and all kinds of extremism and to commit to learn together as faithful Christians and Muslims to respect one another.  We also request the relevant authorities to take all necessary measures in bringing the attackers to justice and end such atrocities.  Finally, we ask God to strengthen the efforts to build peace and stability so that we can achieve security, justice and independence for all in this troubled region. To this end, we pray for the protection of our people and an end to the embargo and isolation of Gaza that is threatening the well-being of the entire area.”

“Prominent Palestinian Christian killed in Gaza”, Nidal al-Mughrabi, Reuters, October 7, 2007

“A prominent Palestinian Christian in the Gaza Strip was found dead on Sunday after being abducted near his home, six months after the religious bookshop he ran was blown up.  There was no claim of responsibility for the killing of Rami Ayyad, director of the Protestant Holy Bible Society.  Medical officials in the Hamas-controlled territory said he had been stabbed and shot. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh condemned the killing and said the Islamist movement ‘would not allow anyone to sabotage’ Muslim-Christian relations.  Some 3,000 Christians live among 1.5 million Muslims in the Gaza Strip and relations between two communities have generally been good…Last April, an explosion at the Holy Bible Society in Gaza City blew out windows and ignited a fire that burned shelves of Christian religious texts and pamphlets. Police said a bomb caused the blast.  Attacks against Christian sites in the territory are rare but at least 40 Internet cafes and video cassette shops have been blown up in the past year.  Many of the bombings were claimed by ‘The Righteous Swords of Islam’, a little-known group opposed to what it described as violations of Islamic tenets…”                                                                                                                      Full article >

“Israel rescinds Arab Christian clergy travel rights in W. Bank”, Associated Press, October 26, 2007

“Israel has rescinded some travel privileges for Arab Christian clergy traveling to and around the West Bank because of security concerns, an Israeli spokeswoman said Friday.  The decision means the religious leaders' visas will be good for one entry only, and not for repeat visits as in the past, Interior Ministry spokeswoman Sabine Haddad said. This means they will be required to coordinate each trip they make, she said… Israel and the Palestinian territories are home to a small Christian minority, with members of the religion comprising less than two percent of the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip…Father Jack Abed, a parish priest of the Melkite Catholic community near the West Bank town of Ramallah, said the new rule violated understandings between Israel and the Vatican.  ‘One of the agreements is the freedom of movement and worship,’ he said. 'There is no freedom of movement if Israel wants to limit visas to a single entry.’”                                                                 Full article >

=========================================================================