'Geneva Accord' presents hope

Two weeks ago, former Israeli Minister Yossi Beilin and Palestinian Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo released the "Geneva Accord", a document detailing a potential Israel-Palestinian peace deal, an effort that "marks the historic reconciliation between the Arab world and Israel".

The accord is effectively a completion of the Taba negotiations of January 2001 - the last serious run at a final deal between the two sides before the election of Ariel Sharon as Prime Minister.

Most of the elements of this "deal" are well-known:
A Palestinian state in the 1967 borders of the West Bank and Gaza with any adjustments compensated through land from inside Israel; Occupied Jerusalem as the capital of both sovereign states, with specific arrangements for the Al Buraq Wall, the Al Haram Al Qudsi Al Sharif and other areas; recognition that UN res. 194 (right of return) is the basis for resolving the refugee issue; a choice of "permanent place of residence" for the refugees including Palestine, third countries, Israel (a prescribed number), and present host countries; compensation for both refugees and host countries of refugees. One relatively new element is the introduction of a multinational force under the authority of an international verification group into Palestine.

Abed Rabbo and Beilin have considered everything in this accord from the details of the corridor between the West Bank and Gaza to a joint "Jerusalem Coordination and Development Committee" to run the municipal affairs of the city. They have achieved a remarkably detailed accord - and it is both God and the devil in the details here.

"God" is in the details because the ability to describe an Israeli-Palestinian deal with such accuracy is testament that a deal is indeed possible between these two intractable sides - at least on paper.

Here it is in black and white, leaving no stone unturned, committees and verification teams woven into every strand to ensure that implementation can, in theory, work. This accord presents hope and concrete possibility.

The "devil" is also in the details because the Geneva Accord is a mountain of specifics without a mechanism for achieving that agreement nor a movement towards implementation.

Indeed, its impressive level of detail is deceiving because it puts up the appearance of a reality that is very far from the daily lives of Israelis and Palestinians. The gap between the possible (the accord) and the real remains huge, and it cannot be bridged by detail.

What is needed is not the "God" or "devil" in the expertise and completeness of the project, nor the emphasis on this level of detail, but a more human hand: the goodwill on both sides to live together.

This basic human commodity has been squeezed out of both by bombs and oppression, but, let us face it, a "Geneva Accord" is just a piece of paper unless that goodwill, that desire to end a cycle of death, supports it.

It is the leadership on both sides that needs to generate that good will and realism, for the average citizen cannot. That leadership need not only be political, indeed that is probably a problem if it is. It is the "opinion makers" of all kinds in the society that must go at it with the enthusiasm of the radicals.

The accord is probably as good as it gets at this stage of history but it will remain a paper document until Israelis and Palestinians transform it into a living affair.

The writer is a former UN and Canadian diplomat, a commentator on Middle East and international affairs.