May/June 2000

English translation of 23 June letter from Sharansky to Barak

(translated by Sharansky's office)

Ehud Barak
Prime Minister of Israel

June 23rd 2000

Mr. Prime Minister,

Based on what I have learned in recent days, both from my own sources and from the Israeli and foreign media, I have reached two conclusions. First, that the team responsible for negotiations with the Palestinians has crystallized the Israeli position in a future agreement. Second, that you have developed a 'clever strategy' to ensure the agreement's acceptance by the Israeli people.

The elements of an agreement are even more problematic then I had assumed a few weeks ago, and include among them:

1. Jerusalem - Concessions on Israeli control in parts of Jerusalem.

2. Right of Return - A vague formulation acceptable to the Palestinians which I interpret as granting the right of return to Palestinian refugees within the Green Line.

3. The Jordan River, its bridges and the Jordan, Valley will be transferred to Palestinian Authority.

The 'clever strategy' is based on the following considerations.
A. It is clear to you that the elements outlined above are not acceptable to a number of coalition partners, I among them. At the same time, you believe, and rightly so, that without these partners, you do not possess the broad public support necessary to attend a summit in America, Therefore, you have attempted to include the coalition partners in a summit they oppose by claiming that "in fact, there is not yet an agreement, and in any case, any difference of opinion that will be found among us at the time of the summit will be addressed there."

B. With regard to the summit talks in America, you are the only one who knows what you expect to achieve in the negotiations, while your coalition partners are left in the dark. To bridge the wide gaps between you and your coalition partners requires patience, time and discretion, none of which are afforded by the atmosphere of a summit. Quite the contrary - the disagreements between us, and perhaps even an internal conflict, will take place under the glare of the cameras. In the end, we will be left with only one choice - to agree to an accord to which we are opposed, or to reject it and return home. This may sound simple in theory, but I know and you know that the option to reject an agreement is unrealistic and would lead to the disgrace of Israel before the world.

C. The agreement will then be brought to a referendum. Let's assume for a moment that the Israeli people will reject such an agreement. But after the worldwide ceremonies and celebrations that can be expected to come in the wake of an agreement, such a rejection would result in Israel finding herself in her most isolated international position since the founding of the State. The fear of this possibility will silence many of the agreement's opponents from voicing their opposition - which perhaps is precisely what advocates of your current strategy are counting on.

This is indeed a clever strategy. But it is not the way to deal with either coalition partners or with an Israeli electorate that has chosen you to lead them - particularly not with an issue that may determine the fate of this country and the fate of the Jewish people in this generation and for many generations to come.

In my opinion, the aboveboard and responsible approach is to go to the summit with a plan that has the backing f a majority of Israelis, expressed in a national unity government, through which the debate over the principles of an agreement will take place before you depart for a summit and not while you are there. In doing so, you will arrive at the summit with the strength and backing necessary for this fateful and complex undertaking, enjoying the broad and open support of a majority of the Israeli people - and look them confidently in the eye upon your return.

Mr. Prime Minister, this is the only approach of which I am aware which can lead to a peace agreement which I can support, and this is the only approach to which my party and I can be partners.

I call on you once again to stop your race toward a summit that is based on a "clever strategy' for dealing with your coalition partners and with the Israeli public, and instead to go to a summit when you will enjoy the support of the people of Israel and when the vast majority of their representatives will be partners to the process. If you do this, I will be happy to work at your side to forge consensus and agreement within the nation. Unfortunately, if you continue on your present course, it will mean the end of the partnership between us.

Respectfully Yours
Natan Sharansky

Israel Report May/June 2000 {} Home Page
Copyright © 1996-2003 All Rights Reserved.
Recommended Links
  • C and M Law Corporation, the Los Angeles personal injury attorney firm, has been serving the city’s residents for over 45 years. People who think they do not need the services of an experienced personal injury attorney, invariably find out the hard way that they should have chosen that right lawyer in the very beginning. Regardless of the type of accident or injury, we have the experience to successfully represent you and your family. If you or someone you know has been injured through the negligence or recklessness of others, come see us. Voted in the top one percent of trial lawyers in the USA, our lawyers go the distance. We can help get you the compensation you and your loved ones deserve. The personal injury attorney Los Angeles firm of C and M Law Corporation has won an excess of 2 Billion Dollars in settlements!
    Powered By:NuvioTemplates.com