US embassy cable - 04BRUSSELS1586

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 001586 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREF, EAID, UNRWA, EUN, USEU BRUSSELS 
SUBJECT: DONORS EYE ISRAELI PULLOUT WITH MIXTURE OF HOPE, 
CONCERN 
 
 
1. (U) Summary:  At a one-day informal meeting of the 
"no-name" group in Brussels, convened by Canada to discuss 
Palestinian refugee issues, participants were fixated on the 
issue of Israel,s proposed withdrawal from Gaza, which they 
characterized as posing both an opportunity and an enormous 
challenge.  They were anxious to learn more details of PM 
Sharon,s plan, and what the U.S. reaction to it would be 
when Sharon visits the U.S. April 13-15.  The group was 
unanimous that Israel should coordinate its pullout with the 
governing authorities in Gaza; that Israel should ensure 
continued humanitarian access; and that the international 
community (especially donors), the Palestinian Authority, and 
the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian 
Refugees (UNRWA) need to begin planning now for the host of 
issues implied by The withdrawal.  End summary. 
 
2. (U) Participants of the meeting: 
 
Ambassador Marc Otte, EU Special Representative for Mideast 
Peace; 
Christian Berger, political officer, Directorate General 
RELEX, European Commission; 
Charlotta Sparre, Swedish PermRep to EU; 
Geoffrey Dean, Dept. Of Foreign Affairs, Canada; 
Markus Kostner, World Bank Representative for West Bank and 
Gaza, Washington DC; 
Takashi Ishii, Japanese mission to EU; 
Mark Singleton, MFA, Netherlands; 
Fritz Froelich, MFA, Switzerland; 
Barbara Fontana, MFA, Switzerland; 
Katherina Lack, Foreign Office, Germany; 
Benedicte de Monthaur, MFA, France; 
Oleg Ozerov, MFA, Russia; 
Martin Rapley, DFID, United Kingdom; 
Age Tiltnes, Regional Representative for FAFO, Amman; 
Bernard Philippe, European Commission; 
Matthias Burchard, UNRWA, Geneva; 
Lindsay Campbell-Reidhead, USEU/PRM; 
Robert Ward, program officer, PRM, Washington, DC; 
Keith chang, CIDA, Canada; 
Roula El Rifai, IDRC, Canada; 
Helene Kadi, CIDA, Canada; 
Wolfgang Barwinkel, EU; 
Jan Thesleff, EU; 
Rex Brynen, McGill University, Canada; 
Jill Sinclair; Foreign Affairs, Canada; 
Ghaith Al Omars, Geneva Accord negotiator, Jerusalem; 
Daniel Levy, Geneva Accord negotiator, Jerusalem. 
 
3. (U) The Refugee Working Group (RWG) was established under 
the Declaration of Principles in 1993 and Canada was named 
chair.  Although the RWG is defunct, Canada remains active in 
its leadership role on Palestinian refugee issues and 
Convened a meeting of the group of interested countries ("no 
name" group) April 2 in Brussels.   Major themes of the 
meeting follow. 
 
Negotiate or coordinate 
----------------------- 
 
4. (U) Participants expressed concern about a unilateral 
pullout from Gaza by Israel.  They echoed Palestinian 
pollster Khalil Shikaki,s warning that an Israeli pullout 
without prior negotiation could lead to infighting, chaos, 
anarchy, and a worsening humanitarian situation.  One 
participant noted that a recent poll in Gaza revealed 55 
percent thought that an Israeli pullout without negotiation 
would strengthen extremist groups (Hamas). There may not be a 
need to negotiate Israel,s withdrawal, but there is a need 
to coordinate a pullout, participants agreed.  In fact, in 
the absence of an actual pullout timetable, it was warned 
that an escalatory climate is emerging.  In this climate, the 
Israeli military has little choice but to take a forward 
military posture while Palestinians scramble to "make their 
mark" by imparting the most damage possible before a military 
withdrawal. Given the implications suggested, coordination 
may need to preempt further progress toward a pullout. 
However, many noted that, by working with the Palestinian 
authority, the GoI and the international community could 
strengthen the foundering institution, which would not only 
improve prospects for Gaza, but also spur the defunct peace 
process. 
 
Access routes, humanitarian aid 
------------------------------- 
 
5. (U) Participants were unanimous that Israel needed to keep 
access corridors open so that humanitarian aid could flow 
into Gaza (especially through Karni).  They also noted that 
an Israeli pullout would likely compel the international 
community to hold a donor,s conference to raise funds for 
the reconstruction of Gaza, and that such reconstruction, if 
done right, could serve as a model for the West Bank.  A 
first step would be the conducting of a comprehensive needs 
assessment. 
 
Economic development a top priority 
----------------------------------- 
 
6. (U) Participants were also unanimous that should the GoI 
pull out of Gaza, donors should focus on rebuilding the Gaza 
airport and port so that economic development can proceed. 
Without the port and airport, Gaza will remain an economic 
basket case relying on international handouts.  One 
participant noted that it would be important for the GoI to 
issue a minimum number of permits for Gazans to work in 
Israel, which is important considering there are few economic 
opportunities in Gaza and wages are higher in Israel.  The 
Netherlands rep noted that even with an Israeli pullout, 
investors would likely steer clear of Gaza until a final 
settlement occurred, which could be years away.  A complete 
Israeli pullout would also likely result in a new flow of 
trade between Gaza and Egypt, ending Gaza,s economic 
dependence on Israel. 
 
Security 
-------- 
 
7. (U) Several participants highlighted the importance of 
security following an Israeli pullout.  Swiss rep Froelich 
suggested that the donors formulate a plan to train and 
finance 1000 police to help keep law and order.  Russian rep 
Ozerov suggested the temporary insertion of an international 
force to maintain security.  The World Bank rep noted that an 
Israeli pullout would provide the pportunity for us to 
bolster the Palestinian Authority,s capacity to administer 
Gaza.  If we fail to identify a Palestinian partner and 
subsequently fail to get the necessary mandate needed to meet 
demands, then the power base in Gaza will be up for grabs. 
The inclusion of the PA from the outset will be essential. 
Otherwise, Hamas is likely to fill the vacuum, several 
participants concurred. 
 
Land use 
-------- 
 
8. (U) Participants noted that an Israeli pullout would 
trigger an intense debate within Gaza regarding land use 
issues.  There are only 1200 or so houses in Israeli 
settlements in Gaza - and they are higher quality and more 
expensive than refugee housing.   Thus, the governing 
authority might sell them rather than let refugees take them 
over.  There is a question of what land is state land and 
what land is private land.  There is also a question as to 
what would happen with the refugee camps.  Refugees think 
they own the housing they are living in, but they do not. 
The pullout would bring great pressure on the governing 
authority to relieve the congestion of the refugee camps, 
which are severely overcrowded in Gaza.  The PA's Ministry of 
Planning should begin working on housing plans for Gaza, if 
it has not already started to do so.  However, the PA should 
not have sole responsibility over the land issue.  It will be 
necessary to impart international control; otherwise there is 
a very real risk of infighting over land, which the PA would 
be unable to control.  The UNRWA rep noted that donors could 
help right now by fully funding UNRWA,s 2004 emergency 
appeal, which requests $32 million for housing projects in 
Gaza.  (Note:  The USG has contributed $20 million of the 
total $45 million donated to UNRWA,s emergency appeal in 
2004.  The appeal requests $193 million in humanitarian 
assistance for the West Bank and Gaza.  End note.) 
 
Flow of refugees, control of border 
----------------------------------- 
 
9. (U) Participants noted that if Israel should pull out 
completely, pressure might mount on Gaza refugees living in 
Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan to return via Egypt to Gaza 
without waiting for a "final" settlement.  Such movements 
could have ramifications for the peace process. 
 
UNRWA,s role? 
------------- 
 
10. (U)  UNRWA rep Burchard noted that UNRWA, s mandate 
allows it to care For non-refugees in emergency situations. 
Therefore, UNRWA could be the conduit for assistance for the 
500,000 non-refugees in Gaza, as well as the 900,000 refugees 
there in the event of an Israeli pullout.  UNRWA,s 
longer-term role in Gaza would have to be revisited by the 
United Nations General Assembly, which sets UNRWA,s mandate 
every three years. 
 
Conclusion 
---------- 
 
11. (U) Participants, while generally upbeat about the 
prospects of an Israeli pullout, were also well aware of how 
many ways things could go wrong.  They were cognizant of the 
inherent difficulty in brainstorming a response to the 
withdrawal absent a copy of the actual Israeli plan.  There 
is a "matrix of possibilities," as one participant said. 
Ideally, participants want their governments to have input 
into how to help manage the Israeli withdrawal in a way that 
minimizes the potential for a humanitarian disaster for 
Palestinian refugees.  They want to be briefed on the plan by 
the quartet, and to have a say in discussions regarding 
reconstruction of Gaza, which they as donors will be called 
upon to fund.  One participant noted that donors are tired of 
pouring money into the "black hole" of the occupied 
territories, and stressed that donors want to be sure that 
this time, their money will be used in a transparent and 
accountable fashion such that there is real movement from 
relief to development.  They also acknowledged that 
throughout the process, there will be a need for the 
governing authority, as well as the international community, 
to solicit the views of the refugees themselves prior to 
taking actions on their behalf. 
 
(This cable was drafted by PRM/ANE.) 
 
SCHNABEL