Salmond and Unionist politicians both talk as though theirs is the risk free option that will eliminate uncertainty about the future for Scots. Risks and uncertainty can only be reduced by recognising we can’t know for certain what the outcome of any choice will be and making plans for various possible outcomes

The SNP leadership and unionist politicians both talk as though if we just adopt the option they favour, Scots will face no uncertainties about the future and no risks. Salmond and Osborne are both stubbornly sticking with their own plan, with no plans on what to do if it doesn’t lead to the results they expect.

After the financial crisis, the Iraq war and the floods, continuing with no plans for different possible outcomes and just sticking to old assumptions will not do fine.

Eliminating risk and uncertainty is impossible, but by having plans prepared for various possibilities we can reduce both.

Scotland and the pound – Or the Euro?
Or its own currency?
Or staying in the UK? Every option brings risks

It’s true that the UK government couldn’t stop an independent Scotland using the pound, but that’s only half the truth. An independent Scotland would inherit its share of the UK’s assets and liabilities. That means it would inherit a share of the UK’s national debt – i.e an independent Scotland would be in debt. True, it would be at most no higher a debt as a percentage of GDP than the UK has.

However the UK has its own currency. If an independent, indebted Scotland didn’t have its own currency it would risk being in the same position as Ireland and Greece were after the financial crisis – forced to beg other governments or the IMF to provide them with pounds.  We might face the same harsh terms imposed on Ireland and Greece. If it joined the Euro it might have exactly the same problem.

Scotland could issue its own currency, but if it issued its own currency immediately on independence it would increase the risk of being targeted by currency speculators. There are other options though.

First, keeping using the pound for a few years after independence, before issuing our own currency. We could issue our own currency once the recession caused by the financial crisis has ended, and after uncertainty among businesses and investors over how independence would affect them has become less intense.

Ireland kept using the British pound for many years after independence before issuing its own Irish pound.

Of course lacking our own currency for several years while in debt would restrict what the Scottish government could do until it issued its own currency.

Another option would be to issue our own currency (e.g Scottish Pound) pegged in value to equal to the British pound. We could ban international currency trading of it and large transfers of it outside the country for the first 5 years.

During the Asian financial crisis in the late 90s the IMF advised Asian countries to keep their currency markets open, continue deregulated markets etcetera. The result was disaster for most of them.

Malaysia managed to make the crisis much less bad for it by pegging its currency to the dollar, banning all international currency trading of it and imposing limits on the amount of currency Malaysians could take abroad to stop the run on its currency which was fuelled by speculators.

As with the US and European financial crises the cause was deregulation empowering fraud and speculation.

Some might ask, so why not stick with the pound and stay in the UK to avoid these risks? The pound is no guarantee for economic stability for Scotland or even England though. We had the pound and were in the union and suffered the banking crisis and the recession since it.

In the 1980s an economic boom in the city of London financial sector led the UK government to increase interest rates to double figures during a recession in Scotland and the North of England, whose economies were devastated as a result.

With a government led by a party which gets more than half its donations from banks and hedge funds, UK economic policy continues to be made for the benefit of the banks and hedge funds, not the whole country. So the status quo carries its own risks. Another crisis as bad as the banking crisis could happen at any time.

Independence would provide a chance of regulating Scotland’s financial sector properly, which would be an example UK governments would find it difficult to ignore.

A country’s size doesn’t make it safer from economic crises
Regulation and having its own currency do
So staying in theUK doesn’t guarantee our economic future

Unionists politicians often claim Scotland couldn’t have survived the financial crisis as an independent country, pointing to Iceland, Greece and Ireland as supposed evidence that small countries can’t make it.

This is confusing the causes of the crisis, which was nothing to do with the size of the countries and everything to do with deregulation and in Greece and Ireland’s cases with not having their own currencies.

Norway, which has a population of 5 million – similar to Ireland’s and less than Scotland’s – regulated its banks properly and has its own currency. As a result it didn’t suffer the financial crisis suffered by the UK with over 10 times its population or the US with over 40 times its population, nor did it suffer any recession as a result.

Safe and secure with small government, welfare cuts,
personal debt crises and deregulation?

Welfare cuts and public sector job cuts by successive UK governments of both parties have eroded the welfare state on the false assumption that the market, left to its own devices, will provide employment to all who want it.

The  Conservatives in the Coalition government have gone far further than Labour did with this, but most of the “reforms” being carried out under the Conservatives were already being planned under Brown and Blair, even if they might not have taken them to the same extremes.

As a result the number of people reliant on food banks has increased by a factor of 10 in the first 3 years of the Coalition government, many genuinely disabled people are denied enough money to survive. Is that certainty, security and lack of risk?

Neither unionist parties nor the SNP have put forward any plan to deal with the personal debt crisis facing millions of people in the Scotland and the UK, which could also lead to an economic crisis affecting even those who are not in debt as millions go bankrupt and default on their debts.

Neither have either side put forward any serious plan to reverse the growing inequality which, if it’s not changed, will make any economic growth irrelevant as only a tiny minority will benefit from it.

So the unionist claims that staying part of the UK automatically makes Scotland (or any of the rest of the UK’s population) safe and secure is ridiculous.

To even significantly reduce the risks and uncertainties most people live with we need several things. Proper regulation of the financial sector. An end to allowing banks and hedge funds to buy political influence through donations to political parties. Enforcement of anti-monopoly and oligopoly laws. A guaranteed comprehensive welfare state.

The floods in England again show how the minimal government neo-liberal theory backfires. Man-made climate change, cuts to the Environment Agency’s budget and relaxing of planning processes (especially on building on flood plains) led to disaster for thousands - and a government left impotent by its own small government agenda.

Acknowledging Uncertainty,
Planning for various possibilities

Yes and No campaigns, unionists and nationalists, alike, need to start acknowledging that they can’t be certain what the results of the choices they advocate would be - and providing a set of various plans to deal with each major possibility.

Politicians are frequently successful by telling people what they want to hear – and we all often convince ourselves that what we want to believe is the truth. But that often backfires with severe consequences for everyone. Better to face up to the facts, including the fact that there are many questions which we can’t be 100% certain of the answers to – and that it’s better to have planned various options to deal with various possible outcomes.

A power sharing peace plan for Syria based on Lebanon - and why regime change in Syria by arming rebels, no-fly-zone or invasion would strengthen Al Qa'ida and lead to continued sectarian civil war, as it did in Iraq and Libya

Tony Blair , John McCain and other advocates of regime change by military force in Syria are ignoring the disasters it has created elsewhere, and its role, via Iraq, in creating the current crisis in Syria (1) – (2). Lebanon shows that power sharing can succeed in ending sectarian civil wars where force will fail.

Iraq’s continuing sectarian civil war is now worse than ever (3). Al Qa’ida in Iraq has become stronger than ever since the US ended their funding for Iraqi awakening militias, which had got many former Iraqi Sunni allies of Al Qa’ida to fight against it (4) – (6). Al Qa’ida In Iraq has said that it helped establish the Al Qaeda’s Syrian wing, Al Nusrah (7).

Libya is often presented as a successful regime change by force. Yet former rebel militias have tortured and killed Gadaffi’s supporters and even his former opponents, along with thousands of black Libyans, who have also been ethnically cleansed from towns like Tawergha (8) – (15). Islamist groups have also attacked British and French embassy staff and killed US embassy staff (16) – (18). Al Qa’ida has also been able to use Libya as a base for attacks on French uranium miners in Niger (19).

Regime change by force in Syria, whether just by invasion, by arming the rebels, or by a pseudo no-fly-zone actually used for regime change, as in Libya, would also strengthen Al Qa’ida ; and merely replace Sunnis and Assad opponents including civilians and children being systematically and systematically raped, tortured and killed by Assad’s forces , deliberately, on a large scale, with Alawites, Shia, Christians, Kurds and Assad supporters as victims of extremists among the rebels.

There have already been sectarian massacres of Alawites by anti-Assad Sunni jihadists in the town of Aqrab and of Shia in Hatla. Syrian refugees include huge numbers of Syrian Christians fleeing Sunni extremist groups among the rebels, just as Iraqi Christians did (20) – (23).

Even some FSA rebels say Alawites (Assad’s religion) can’t be civilians, while supposedly “moderate” Sunni clerics say anyone working for or supporting the Syrian government should be killed (24).

Increasing rebel car and suicide bombings, mostly by Al Nusrah, routinely kill as many or more civilians than combatants. (Many of the bombers are Al Qa’ida men who learnt the method in Iraq and Afghanistan, or trained by them ) (25) – (29).

Rebels also target and kill Syrian and Iranian state TV journalists and other employees as much as Assad’s forces target other journalists (30) – (32).

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International report that rebels have also tortured and executed not only captured soldiers or militia-men but many civilians too, some merely for being Alawites or Shia Muslims. While the majority of bodies found with torture marks and bullets in the back of their heads are killed by Assad’s forces, many of the dead, who include women and teenagers, are killed by rebels (33) – (34).

Given the vast number of groups among the rebels and the lack of any real organised command structure among many of them, any rebel victory would also likely to be followed by chaos and continuing civil war in which Al Qa’ida would continue to thrive.

Syria experts and journalists on the ground says the FSA doesn’t even exist as an organisation, backed up by the words of some FSA fighters themselves who say they don’t take orders from anyone (35) – (37).

Even if Al Nusrah/Qaeda lost a second round of civil war, all the rebel groups are Islamist, overwhelmingly Sunni, and only differing in how extreme or sectarian they are, including at least 80% FSA affiliated groups (38) – (39).

We already know from Al Nusrah youtube videos that some of the Croatian and former Yugoslav arms provided by the Saudis with CIA co-ordination via Jordan and NATO members Turkey and Croatia have got into the hands of Al Nusrah/Al Qa’ida ; and that General Idriss, the nominal commander of the FSA, can’t even get units he sends arms and money to tell him what they did with the last lot he sent them, never mind obey his orders (40) – (43).

Some FSA unit commanders say there are entire fake FSA brigades which exist only to get arms to sell on (44).

So neither arming the rebels nor ‘no-fly zone’ regime change will end the atrocities against civilians, nor defeat Al Qa’ida and other groups as extreme in Syria. Only a viable peace plan can do that.

The US arming the rebels directly does not rule out using this as a way to get Assad to negotiate with a viable peace plan as the starting point for negotiations, if it is done only on a scale that makes the military balance a bit more equal, or total victory by force for Assad unattainable.

Lessons from Lebanon

Lebanon’s example shows power sharing works to end sectarian civil wars where military force or arming one side usually fails.

Intervention in the sectarian Lebanese civil war by British, French and US forces in the 1980s failed to end it (partly because these foreign forces started taking sides).

Article 5 of the 1991 Taif agreement which ended the 15 year Lebanese civil war included sharing parliamentary seats equally between Christians and Muslims with certain proportions also guaranteed to other minorities within these two groups.  This power sharing has been retained in Lebanon’s electoral law (45).

The three most powerful political positions, President, Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament, were already guaranteed to a Christian, Sunni and Shia respectively by the 1943 National Pact. Taif made the relative power of the three offices more equal by reducing the President’s powers and increasing the Speaker’s so that some talk of them as three Presidents (46).

A power sharing peace plan for Syria

In Syria power sharing could be between opponents and supporters of Assad, or between Sunni Arabs on the one hand and Alawites and other minorities on the other (again providing agreed shares to the other minorities), including a referendum on replacing the Presidency with a multi-member ruling council, indirectly elected by parliament, to give every faction a share of power. The ruling council's decisions could require unanimity, parliamentary approval by a two-thirds majority and in some cases a referendum too.

Guaranteed equal power sharing no matter what the election results may seem strange when most countries have winner-takes-all elections in which one side is winner and one loser in each election. Yet many of these elections are decided by a few per cent of the vote and provide big majorities to parties which got a minority of the vote, while excluding those who got almost as many votes from government entirely. Is that really more democratic? And why would either side in a life or death conflict agree to accept election results if they excluded it from power entirely and so put its leaders and their supporters at risk of torture and death?

Rebel groups which signed up to power sharing could become Syrian army units under their existing commanders, or else all militias could agree to disband and hand over their weapons, with an agreement that within a fixed time half of all professional soldiers and officers would be Sunnis, with each non-Sunni religion and the Kurds getting an agreed proportion of the other half, along with similar changes in the composition of the police and judiciary.

Any armed group which rejected the agreement or continued hostilities (most likely including Al Qaida / Nusrah) could be attacked as an enemy by all who had, until it was defeated, disarmed and disbanded, or accepted the agreement.

Isolating or weakening Al Qa’ida is a common interest for the NATO and Gulf Co-Operation Council governments (Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni monarchies) as well as Russia’s and Iran’s.

In the unlikely event that Al Nusrah did sign up to the peace agreement, it would have to end violence and become more moderate to keep any share of power. The peace process in Northern Ireland showed that even when extremists were elected on both sides (Martin McGuiness of Sinn Feinn and Dr Ian Paisley of the Democratic Unionist Party) they worked together amicably and helped isolate any groups which refused to end violence (e.g ‘the Real IRA’).

This plan would be an addition to Kofi Annan’s 6 point peace plan rather than an alternative to it.

The biggest problem will be the anarchic nature of the rebels, making it difficult to find representatives who most of them will accept as negotiators.

Why power sharing agreements are needed in Iraq and maybe elsewhere too

Similar power sharing proposals in Iraq, between Shias, on the one hand, and Sunnis and Kurds, on the other, could go a long way towards ending the sectarian violence there and stopping it spilling over into Syria again and from Syria to Lebanon, though the triple division makes this more difficult as the Kurds might side with the Shia on some issues.

Power sharing in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Emirates would also allow democratisation without Sunnis fearing losing power to Shia entirely. Jordan and Egypt could also benefit from power sharing between secular and Muslim groups.

(1) = guardian.co.uk 15 Jun 2013 ‘Tony Blair calls for west to intervene in Syria conflict’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/15/tony-blair-west-intervene-syria

(2) = CNN 15 Jun 2013 ‘Sources: U.S. to send small arms, ammo to Syrian rebels’,
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/14/world/meast/syria-civil-war/ , (scroll down to bolded sub-heading ‘McCain: Rebels losing fight’)

(3) = guardian.co.uk 11 Jun 2013 ‘Deadly attacks deepen Iraq's sectarian divide’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/deadly-attacks-iraq-sectarian-divide

(4) = USA Today 09 Oct 2012 ‘Al-Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say’,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/10/09/al-qaeda-iraq/1623297/ , ‘But now, Iraqi and U.S. officials say, the insurgent group has more than doubled in numbers from a year ago — from about 1,000 to 2,500 fighters. And it is carrying out an average of 140 attacks each week across Iraq, up from 75 attacks each week earlier this year, according to Pentagon data.’

(5) Reuters / guardian.co.uk 20 Mar 2013 ‘Al-Qaida claims responsibility for Iraq anniversary bombings’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/20/al-qaida-iraq-anniversary-bombings

(6) = BBC World Service 13 May 2009 ‘Awakening Councils face uncertain future’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2009/05/090513_awakening_wt_sl.shtml

(7) = Reuters 09 Apr 2013 ‘Iraqi al Qaeda wing merges with Syrian counterpart’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/09/us-syria-crisis-nusra-iraq-idUSBRE93807R20130409

(8) = Amnesty International 04 Jul 2012 'Libya: Militia stranglehold corrosive for rule of law ', http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/libya-militia-stranglehold-corrosive-rule-law-2012-07-04

(9) = Medicines Sans Frontieres 26 Jan 2012 'Libya: detainees tortured and denied medical care', http://www.msf.org.uk/libyaprison360112_20120126.news

(10) = Times 12 July 2012 'Hate and fear: the legacy of Gaddafi', http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article3472720.ece

(11) = Amnesty International UK 07 Sep 2011 'Libya: Tawarghas being targeted in reprisal beatings and arrests',http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19674

(12) = Human Rights Watch 30 Oct 2011 'Libya: Militias Terrorizing Residents of ‘Loyalist’ Town', http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/10/30/libya-militias-terrorizing-residents-loyalist-town

(13) = New York Times 02 Mar 2012 'U.N. Faults NATO and Libyan Authorities in Report',http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/world/africa/united-nations-report-faults-nato-over-civilian-deaths-in-libya.html?_r=1 ; 'Certain revenge attacks have continued unabated, particularly the campaign by the militiamen of Misurata to wipe a neighboring town, Tawergha, off the map; the fighters accuse its residents of collaborating with a government siege.

Such attacks have been documented before, but the report stressed that despite previous criticism, the militiamen were continuing to hunt down the residents of the neighboring town no matter where they had fled across Libya. As recently as Feb. 6, militiamen from Misurata attacked a camp in Tripoli where residents of Tawergha had fled, killing an elderly man, a woman and three children, the report said. '

(14) = Independent on Sunday 08 July 2012 'Patrick Cockburn: Libyans have voted, but will the new rulers be able to curb violent militias?', http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/patrick-cockburn-libyans-have-voted-but-will-the-new-rulers-be-able-to-curb-violent-militias-7922358.html

(15) = AP/Guardian 09 Jun 2013 ‘Army chief quits after militia kills dozens in Benghazi’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/libya-shield-benghazi-clash-militia

(16) = BBC News 11 Jun 2012 ‘Libya unrest: UK envoy's convoy attacked in Benghazi’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18401792

(17) = BBC News 23 Apr 2012 ‘Tripoli: French embassy in Libya hit by car bomb’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22260856

(18) = Guardian.co.uk 12 Sep 2012 ‘Chris Stevens, US ambassador to Libya, killed in Benghazi attack’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/12/chris-stevens-us-ambassador-libya-killed

(19) = Reuters 25 May 2013 ‘Niger attacks launched from southern Libya - Niger's president’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/25/niger-attacks-libya-idUSL5N0E60DD20130525

(20) = Channel 4 News 14 Dec 2012 ‘Was there a massacre in the Syrian town of Aqrab?’,
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/happened-syrian-town-aqrab/3426

(21) = Independent 12 Jun 2013 ‘Syria: 60 Shia Muslims massacred in rebel ‘cleansing’ of Hatla’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-60-shia-muslims-massacred-in-rebel-cleansing-of-hatla-8656301.html

(22) = Independent 02 Nov 2012 ‘The plight of Syria's Christians: 'We left Homs because they were trying to kill us'’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-plight-of-syrias-christians-we-left-homs-because-they-were-trying-to-kill-us-8274710.html

(23) = New York Times 08 May 2007 'The assault on Assyrian Christians', http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/opinion/08iht-edisaac.1.5618504.html

(24) = UNoCHA IRIN news 13 May 2013 ‘"Sometimes you cannot apply the rules" - Syrian rebels and IHL’, http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=98021

(25) = Reuters 23 Dec 2011 'Analysis: Syria bombings signal deadlier phase of revolt', http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/23/us-syria-bombings-idUSTRE7BM18T20111223 , 'Beirut-based commentator Rami Khouri said he doubted the government would have hit its own security targets, suggesting that the bombings could have been the work of armed rebels,....Hilal Khashan, political science professor at the American University of Beirut, also said he did not believe that the Syrian government was behind the bombings.'

(26) = New York Times 10 May 2012 'Dozens Killed in Large Explosions in Syrian Capital', http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/11/world/middleeast/damascus-syria-explosions-intelligence-headquarters.html?pagewanted=all ; 'Twin suicide car bombs that targeted a notorious military intelligence compound shook the Syrian capital, Damascus… with the Health Ministry putting the toll at 55 dead and nearly 400 wounded — civilians and soldiers. '

(27) = Voice of America 22 Feb 2013 ‘Death Toll Rises in Damascus Blasts’,
http://www.voanews.com/content/death-toll-rises-in-damascus-blasts/1608600.html
‘A Syrian expatriate rights group says a series of bombings in Damascus has killed at least 83 people …Most of the victims are said to be civilians, including many children from a nearby school, with 17 of the dead reported to be members of the security forces.’

(28) = BBC News 11 Jun 2013 ‘Syria crisis: Damascus hit by double 'suicide bombing'’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22852237

(29) = USA Today 09 Jun 2013 ‘Large car bombs increasing in Syria’, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/06/09/syria-ieds-bombs-hezbollah/2401851/

(30) = AP 27 May 2013 ‘Pro-government Syrian journalist Yara Abbas killed in action’, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57586279/pro-government-syrian-journalist-yara-abbas-killed-in-action/

(31) = Atlantic Wire 26 May 2012 ‘Pro-Regime Iranian Journalist Killed by Syrian Rebels’,
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/09/pro-regime-iranian-journalist-killed-syrian-rebels/57288/

(32) = BBC News 27 Jun 2012 ‘Gunmen 'kill seven' at Syrian pro-Assad Ikhbariya TV’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18606341

(33) = Human Rights Watch 20 Mar 2012 ‘Syria: Armed Opposition Groups Committing Abuses - End Kidnappings, Forced Confessions, and Executions’, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/20/syria-armed-opposition-groups-committing-abuses (esp 1st para, 2^nd sentence ‘Abuses include kidnapping, detention, and torture of security force members, government supporters, and people identified as members of pro-government militias, called shabeeha…. executions by armed opposition groups of security force members and civilians.’ – also see under sub-heading ‘Torture’)

(34) = Amnesty International 14 Mar 2013 ‘Syria: Summary killings and other abuses by armed opposition groups’, http://www.amnesty.org/fr/library/asset/MDE24/008/2013/en/21461c90-3702-4892-aa3c-4974bba54689/mde240082013en.html

(35) = ‘The FSA Doesn’t Exist’ by Professor Aron Lund of the Swedish Institute for International Affairs, http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/the-free-syrian-army-doesnt-exist/

(36) = BBC News 09 May 2013 ‘Syria's protracted conflict shows no sign of abating’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22456875

(37) = CBC News 07 Dec 2012 ‘Free Syrian Army an uneasy mix of religious extremes’
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/06/f-vp-bedard-syrian-rebels.html (scroll down to sub-heading ‘Abandoning Secularism’)

(38) = Syria Comment 03 Apr 2013 ‘Sorting out David Ignatius’, by Around Lund, http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sorting-out-david-ignatius/

(39) = Swedish Institute of International Affairs UIBrief No.13 , Sep 2012, ‘Syrian Jihadism’, by Aron Lund, http://www.ui.se/upl/files/77409.pdf , pages 10 to 17

(40) = CBS News /AP 28 Mar 2013 ‘AP: "Master plan" underway to help Syria rebels take Damascus with U.S.-approved airlifts of heavy weapons’, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57576722/ap-master-plan-underway-to-help-syria-rebels-take-damascus-with-u.s.-approved-airlifts-of-heavy-weapons/

(41) = NYT 24 Mar 2013 ‘Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.’, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

(42) = NYT 25 Feb 2013 ‘Saudis Step Up Help for Rebels in Syria With Croatian Arms’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/world/middleeast/in-shift-saudis-are-said-to-arm-rebels-in-syria.html

(43) = http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/world/middleeast/syrian-rebel-leader-deals-with-old-ties-to-other-side.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

(44) = NYT 01 Mar 2013 ‘Syrian Rebel Leader Deals With Ties to Other Side’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/world/middleeast/syrian-rebel-leader-deals-with-old-ties-to-other-side.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

(45) = ‘The Lebanese Civil War and The Taif Agreement’ by Hassem Kraim of the American University of Beirut,
http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/pspa/conflict-resolution.html

(46) = Independent Foundation for Electoral Systems Mar 2009 ‘The Lebanese Electoral System’, http://www.ifes.org/Content/Publications/Papers/2009/The-Lebanese-Electoral-System.aspx

Outline of power sharing peace plan for Syria, modified from Lebanon’s Electoral Law, to add to the Annan plan

There are three points to this plan, which I’ll go into much more detail on in my next post.

(1) = A power sharing constitution loosely based on Lebanon's : A referendum on power sharing between Assad’s supporters and opponents involving :

(a) Assad opponents and supporters (or else Sunnis on one side and non-Sunnis on the other, with each non-Sunni group guaranteed a certain proportion) each being guaranteed half the seats in parliament through an electoral law similar to Lebanon’s, which guarantees half to Muslim parties and half to Christian

(b) the Presidency replaced with two co-Presidents or, better, a multi-member Executive Council, to give all factions a share in power proportional to their share of pro or anti Assad votes

(c)  Each half of parliament to indirectly elect one of the two co-Presidents, or half of the members of the Executive Council

(d)  All government decisions requiring unanimity between the co-Presidents or among the ruling council, plus a two-thirds majority vote in parliament and in some cases a referendum also.

If two-thirds of voters vote yes in the referendum, hold elections to establish a government based on these amendments to the Syrian constitution.

(2) = Rebel units becoming Syrian military units : All rebel units who sign up to a ceasefire and the power sharing agreement to be given the option of becoming Syrian government professional army units under their existing commanders if they wish to. (this idea is based on the failure of the Lebanese plan for the disbanding and disarming of all militias, as an alternative to it)

(3) = Quotas for religious/ethnic composition of the military, police and judiciary : The religious composition of the Syrian professional military (including officers at all ranks), police and judiciary to be changed to 50% Sunnis (including 5% Kurds) within 5 years, the other 50% being split by agreed proportions of Alawites, Shia and Christians.

These would be added to the existing 6 point plan drawn up by Kofi Annan

(1) Commit to an inclusive Syrian-led political process to address the legitimate aspirations and concerns of the Syrian people, and, to this end, commit to appoint an empowered interlocutor when invited to do so by the Envoy;

(2) Commit to stop the fighting and achieve urgently an effective United Nations supervised cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties to protect civilians and stabilise the country.

 To this end, the Syrian government should immediately cease troop movements towards, and end the use of heavy weapons in, population centres, and begin pullback of military concentrations in and around population centres.

As these actions are being taken on the ground, the Syrian government should work with the Envoy to bring about a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties with an effective United Nations supervision mechanism.

Similar commitments would be sought by the Envoy from the opposition and all relevant elements to stop the fighting and work with him to bring about a sustained cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties with an effective United Nations supervision mechanism;

(3) ensure timely provision of humanitarian assistance to all areas affected by the fighting, and to this end, as immediate steps, to accept and implement a daily two hour humanitarian pause and to coordinate exact time and modalities of the daily pause through an efficient mechanism, including at local level;

(4) intensify the pace and scale of release of arbitrarily detained persons, including especially vulnerable categories of persons, and persons involved in peaceful political activities, provide without delay through appropriate channels a list of all places in which such persons are being detained, immediately begin organizing access to such locations and through appropriate channels respond promptly to all written requests for information, access or release regarding such persons

(5) ensure freedom of movement throughout the country for journalists and a non-discriminatory visa policy for them;

 (6) respect freedom of association and the right to demonstrate peacefully as legally guaranteed.

(Annan of course resigned as UN envoy to Syria, but his peace plan proposals remain good ones)

Ending Israeli pre-emptive ground incursions into Gaza and air strikes on it, and Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel, could avoid constant ceasefire breakdowns and wars – a plan by an Israeli peace activist and a Hamas minister could work to end both

Israeli miitary pre-emptive ground incursions into Gaza triggered escalation to war in November 2008 and November 2012. The ceasefire agreement includes an Israeli agreement to end them, along with targeted assassinations like the one that torpedoed the Egyptian government securing a ceasefire sooner. However it has not so far got any Israeli agreement to end all pre-emptive attacks on Gaza against known or suspected plotters of attacks on Israel. An Israeli peace activist and Hamas government minister’s plan could end any need for the pre-emptive Israeli attacks which have caused almost every ceasefire breakdown. It would do it by Israel sharing intelligence on other Palestinian groups in Gaza who are planning attacks on Israel with Egypt, whose government would pass it on to Hamas, who have enforced ceasefires on other Palestinian groups by force in the past – and are seen as credible at enforcing ceasefires by former head of Mossad Efraim Halevy.

President Mohammed Morsi of Egypt and Hilary Clinton have managed to secure the most comprehensive and fair ceasefire agreement so far between Israel and the Hamas government and other Palestinian groups in Gaza  (1).

It includes Israeli commitments to end military incursions into Gaza and targeted assassinations by airstrike. The escalation to war in both 2008 and 2012 began with Israeli military incursions or raids into Gaza ; and the recent war only lasted more than a couple of days due to the assassination by airstrike of a Hamas armed wing commander imploding ceasefire negotiations brokered by Egypt which were close to success.

What the ceasefire deal has not so far dealt with is the wider issue of Israeli pre-emptive attacks in general. Almost every ceasefire breakdown and return to war has been the result of Israeli pre-emptive strikes claimed to be targeting Palestinians involved in planning attacks on Israel.

On 22nd October and 8^th November 2012, as on 5^th November 2008, Israeli ground forces entered Gaza (2) – (4).

The timing of the incursions, in both 2008 and in 2012 , weeks after the Israeli government had called an election and months before it was to be held, has led to suspicions of wars fought for electoral advantage, or at the very least the timing of them determined by it. Certainly in both cases the Israeli government was trying to show how “tough” it was in “defending” Israelis to avoid any vulnerability to criticism from opposition parties (5) – (6)

In both the 5^th November 2008 and 8^th November 2012 incursions the Israeli military said the aim was to destroy tunnels which were being dug out of Gaza, in 2008 to capture Israeli soldiers (this method was used in the capture of Corporal Gilad Shalit by Palestinian armed groups); in 2012 to plant explosives for IED attacks on Israeli patrols along the border (one such attack took place after the November 8^th incursion) (7) – (8).

The October and November 2012 incursions were described by Israeli spokespeople as “routine” or “patrols”, but the results were anything but routine (9) – (10).

The October incursion alone led to a series of attacks on Israeli border patrols, Israeli air and artillery strikes in response and Palestinian rocket fire out of Gaza that included 80 rockets fired out of Gaza in the two days after it.

In the 8^th November incursion which set off the recent escalation, Israeli military spokespeople said helicopters “provided covering fire” as Israeli forces entered Gaza before a later IED attack on an Israeli patrol on the border with Gaza. After Israeli tanks, military vehicles and bulldozers came 500 metres inside Gaza Palestinian militants began fighting with them. A 13 year old Palestinian boy who was playing football was killed  (11) – (18).

In each of the three raids the basic pattern of escalation was the same. Palestinian militants fired on the invaders, just as Israeli forces would if armed Palestinians invaded Israel. Israeli forces responded with air strikes. Palestinian armed groups, lacking an air force to respond in kind with, or any air defences effective against the Israeli air force, respond with rockets (19) – (20).

The only difference with the November 8^th raid is that it led to IED attacks on Israeli patrols on the border with Gaza on November 10^th, which Israeli forces responded to with artillery and tank fire, which killed both militants and then boys going to try to help the wounded, before rocket fire into Israel was stepped up greatly. (21).

In 2012 as in 2008 the Israeli government could then denounce rocket fire by Palestinian armed groups from Gaza as terrorism and look “tough” on “security” during an election campaign; and claim that Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza were the aggressors, while Israel was just defending itself. 

Whether this was a calculated plan or just taking advantage of events is hard to say. Either way the pre-emptive incursions led to the same kind of attacks they were supposed to be intended to prevent, just as Palestinian armed groups’ rocket fire on Israel doesn’t “defend” Palestinian civilians but gets them killed by Israeli retaliation.

(And, no, I am not saying using rocket fire which is inaccurate and likely to kill civilians as revenge for the killing of other civilians or combatants is justified – it’s not ; nor am I saying Israeli air strikes’ targets are always legitimate, many are not – I’m just stating facts on the escalation to war in each case.)

Targeted assassination torpedoed first Egyptian attempt to broker ceasefire-

For several days after the 8^th to 10th November incidents and resultant Palestinian rocket fire and Israeli missile strikes it still looked like the escalation could be ended. Hamas had the agreement of all major armed groups in Gaza to end rocket fire and restore a ceasefire brokered by Egypt. Exactly this has happened after dozens of brief escalations over the years, most begun by either Israeli pre-emptive strikes or targeted assassinations by missile strike, or by groups other than Hamas firing rockets out of Gaza. On one night (between the days of 12^th and 13^th November) just one rocket was fired into Israel and only three Israeli airstrikes carried out on Gaza (22).

Then on November 14th the Israeli government ordered a wave of new airstrikes on Gaza, which, apart from killing two children as collateral damage, included the targeted assassination of Ahmed Al Jabari , head of Hamas’ armed wing (the Qassam brigades) who had organised the enforcement of previous ceasefires ; and was in favour of a long term ceasefire (though not peace) with Israel, and was considering a plan for a ceasefire agreement drafted in Egypt by Israeli peace activists and Hamas deputy foreign minister Ghazi Hamad, according to Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin. (23) – (25).

Pre-emptive Israeli attacks by ground forces or missile strike main cause of ceasefire breakdowns – and the plan to end them and most rocket attacks from Gaza through intelligence sharing via Egypt during ceasefires

Israel has always previously “reserved the right” to carry out pre-emptive strikes on any group it suspects or knows to be planning attacks on Israel. These often kill civilians as collateral damage, particularly as missile strikes often target the family homes of militants, killing wives, children and the elderly ; and even where they don’t, they lead to Palestinian armed groups retaliating – usually with rocket fire into Israel.

The ground incursions into Gaza, like the air strikes, are said to be aimed at preventing terrorist attacks on Israeli forces or civilians before they happen , but as Baskin points out that they often lead to the collapse of ceasefires and cause more attacks than they stop, especially due to civilian collateral deaths.

Baskin was negotiating with Hamas foreign minister Ghazi Hamad (26). Together they devised a plan to avoid the breakdown of ceasefires due to Israeli pre-emptive strikes, by Israel passing on intelligence on any planned attack on Israel by Palestinian groups in Gaza during ceasefires to the Egyptian government, who would pass it to Hamas, who would have 24 or 48 hours to act to stop those plotting it in order to avoid an Israeli pre-emptive strike (27).

This is not so far-fetched as it may sound. Hamas have frequently got the agreement of other Palestinian factions in Gaza to maintain ceasefires, and even enforced the ceasefires on any group breaking them (28). For instance it’s police and paramilitary “security forces” arresting members of Islamic Jihad in April 2010 who had fired rockets during a ceasefire, taking their weapons from them and making them sign an agreement not to break the ceasefire again if they wanted to avoid jail and similarly arresting and jailing members of an even more extreme group for ceasefire breaches in 2011 (29) – (30).

In 2007 the Jewish magazine Forward quoted former head of Mossad Efraim Halevy as saying that Hamas were “not very pleasant people, but they are very, very credible”.  Halevy says Hamas’ past actions show they are capable of maintaining a ceasefire by their own armed wing and largely enforcing it on other groups in Gaza (31).

When there are hundreds of rocket attacks on Israel each year, with the majority causing no casualties, there would be plenty of scope for Israel to test if particular leaders in Hamas used the intelligence it was given to try to warn those planning the attack, or to stop them and it. The risks for Israel, with it’s vastly greater military strength, are trivial, while the benefits to both sides of an end to the cycle of ceasefire breakdowns could be huge.

As Halevy says “It may not work, but aren’t we strong enough to be able to try it?” (32).

As current Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak said in 1999 “The Palestinians…are the weakest of our adversaries. As a military threat they are ludicrous.” (33).

If it worked it would increase trust between the two sides (act as a “confidence building measure” as the jargon goes) and could lead to more willingness to negotiate, at least indirectly through third parties like the Egyptian government, President Abbas of Fatah (now back in coalition with Hamas as the other half of the elected Palestinian government since they won the 2006 Legislative Elections) and Israelis not connected to the Israeli government, like Baskin.

That’s assuming the Israeli government wants peace rather than just keeping the Gaza conflict as a useful distraction from it’s accelerating settlement of most of the West Bank as a prelude to annexation of most of it.

Sources

(1) = Reuters 21 Nov 2012 6.55pm ‘TEXT: Ceasefire agreement between Israel and Gaza's Palestinians’, http://live.reuters.com/Event/Conflict_on_the_Gaza_Strip/57460762

(2) = BBC News 24 Oct 2012 ‘Gaza militants killed in strikes following rocket fire’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20054554

(3) = guardian.co.uk 05 Nov 2008 ‘Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

(4) = Human Rights Watch 15 Nov 2012 ‘Israel/Gaza: Avoid Harm to Civilians’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/11/15/israelgaza-avoid-harm-civilians

(5) = guardian.co.uk 01 Feb 2009 ‘Israel threatens 'disproportionate' response to Palestinian rocket fire’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/01/gaza-israelandthepalestinians ‘The preparation to launch fresh attacks on Gaza comes two weeks after Israel halted a three-week onslaught and claimed its aims were "attained fully".…With nine days to the election and with the ceasefire unravelling, Kadima is scrambling to gain ground on its rightwing rival, Binyamin Netanyahu's Likud party, which looks set to win the election... Despite waging a 22-day war in Gaza, Kadima's coalition government is still scrambling to prove its national security credentials in the face of continuing rocket fire and Netanayahu's calls to purge Hamas from Gaza.’

(6) = CNN 10 Oct 2012 ‘Netanyahu calls early election for Israel’,
http://www.cnn.co.uk/2012/10/09/world/meast/israel-election/index.html ; ‘The election will ideally happen in three months' time, he said, rather than in October 2013, as originally scheduled.’ (3^rd paragraph – i.e January 2013)

(7) = CNN 10 Nov 2012 ‘Funeral held for boy killed in Gaza’,
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/meast/gaza-violence/index.html ‘Israeli Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich.…Leibovich said that 300 meters inside Gaza, Israeli border soldiers had discovered a cache of explosives in a tunnel adjacent to a security fence’

(8) = guardian.co.uk 05 Nov 2008 ‘Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians ; ‘Israeli troops crossed into the Gaza Strip late last night near the town of Deir al-Balah. The Israeli military said the target of the raid was a tunnel that they said Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers positioned on the border fence 250m away.’

(9) = Al Jazeera 09 Nov 2012 ‘Israel blames Hamas for Gaza blast’,
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/11/2012119112941283876.html 4th and 5th from last paragraphs ‘A military spokesman on Friday…"During a routine activity west of Nirim, troops found a number of explosive devices and detonated them in a controlled manner. As a result of earlier fire toward them, they fired towards open areas in the vicinity," he said.’

(10) = BBC News 24 Oct 2012 ‘Gaza militants killed in strikes following rocket fire’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20054554 ; ‘Two members of the groups were killed in an Israeli air strike on Monday. The Israeli military said it had targeted the militants after they fired mortars at a ground patrol. Palestinian sources said the patrol had entered Gaza near Beit Hanoun…’

(11) = Human Rights Watch 15 Nov 2012 ‘Israel/Gaza: Avoid Harm to Civilians’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/11/15/israelgaza-avoid-harm-civilians ; ‘The current round of fighting began on November 8, during an incursion by Israeli forces into southern Gaza, east of Khan Yunis. The Popular Resistance Committees, an armed group, said it fired at Israeli tanks and bulldozers near Khuza’a and detonated an explosive device in a tunnel in the area, according to Ma’an, an independent Palestinian news site. An Israeli military spokesperson said an Israeli soldier had been lightly injured, Ma’an reported. Residents told the The New York Times that Israeli tanks and helicopters opened fire during the clash……….. …..Several armed groups invoked the November 8 clash as a reason for the Palestinian attack on November 10, which wounded four Israeli soldiers. Israeli forces fired several tank or artillery shells in response. One shell wounded members of a Palestinian armed group, one of whom later died. International media and Palestinian rights groups reported that civilians in the area went to the site of the shelling to help the wounded, and that several minutes later more shells struck the area, killing four civilians and wounding perhaps several dozen more

(12) = Washington Post / AP 08 Nov 2012 ‘Israel’s military says explosive-filled tunnel explodes near soldiers on Israel-Gaza border’, http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/israels-military-says-explosive-filled-tunnel-explodes-near-soldiers-on-israel-gaza-border/2012/11/08/f20732d8-29ed-11e2-aaa5-ac786110c486_story.html ;  (7^th paragraph and 3^rd from last para) ‘Palestinian militants and Israeli forces were exchanging fire at the time….Before the blast, Israeli soldiers had entered dozens of meters into Gaza, protected by military helicopters firing a cover of bullets to search for explosives, Leibovich and Palestinian officials said.’

(13) = Al Jazeera 09 Nov 2012 ‘Israel blames Hamas for Gaza blast’,
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/11/2012119112941283876.html ;"Witnesses confirmed that Israeli helicopters had opened fire as tanks carried out an incursion, sparking a brief exchange of fire with fighters. A military spokesman on Friday confirmed troops had been operating in the area and had fired "towards open areas in the vicinity" after coming under attack by gunmen.

(14) = CNN 10 Nov 2012 ‘Funeral held for boy killed in Gaza’,
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/meast/gaza-violence/index.html ‘Israeli Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich.…Leibovich said that 300 meters inside Gaza, Israeli border soldiers had discovered a cache of explosives in a tunnel adjacent to a security fence… Palestinian sources said that, before the boy was shot, a number of Israeli military vehicles and tanks had entered Gaza some 500 meters east of Khan Younis, where they came under fire from militants. The tanks responded by firing two rounds towards farmland’

 (15) = guardian.co.uk 05 Nov 2008 ‘Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians ; ‘A four-month ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza was in jeopardy today after Israeli troops killed six Hamas gunmen in a raid into the territory.

Hamas responded by firing a wave of rockets into southern Israel, although no one was injured. The violence represented the most serious break in a ceasefire agreed in mid-June, yet both sides suggested they wanted to return to atmosphere of calm.

 (16) = Reuters 05 Nov 2008 ‘Israel-Hamas violence disrupts Gaza truce’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/11/05/us-palestinians-israel-violence-idUSTRE4A37B520081105 ‘Hamas fired dozens of rockets at Israel on Wednesday after Israeli forces killed six Palestinian militants in an eruption of violence that disrupted a four-month-old truce along the Gaza Strip's frontier….On Tuesday, Israeli airstrikes killed five militants and Israeli soldiers shot dead a gunman during an incursion into the Gaza Strip. Israeli forces quit the coastal enclave in 2005 and Hamas took control after routing Fatah forces two years later….The Israeli military said the aircraft went into action after militants attacked soldiers who entered Gaza to destroy a tunnel that Hamas had planned to use to kidnap Israeli soldiers.’

(17) = CNN 10 Nov 2012 ‘Funeral held for boy killed in Gaza’ http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/meast/gaza-violence/index.html ; ‘Funeral services were held Friday for a 13-year-old Palestinian boy shot and killed while playing soccer in Gaza a day earlier…the Gaza Health Ministry accused the Israel Defense Forces of killing the boy…Initially, the ministry said the boy was shot in the head by an Israeli helicopter. Witnesses disputed that account…saying the boy was shot in the side and the gunfire came from Israeli military vehicles…Israeli Lt. Col. Avital Leibovich told CNN that an initial investigation by the military "did not indicate the Israeli military had any connection to the shooting."’

(18) = Human Rights Watch 15 Nov 2012 ‘Israel/Gaza: Avoid Harm to Civilians’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/11/15/israelgaza-avoid-harm-civilians ; 14^th Paragraph, 4^th sentence – ‘Palestinian rights groups, the Gaza Health Ministry, and photojournalist Anne Paq, working for the Israeli-Palestinian ActiveStills media group, reported that a bullet from Israeli machinegun fire fatally struck Hamid Abu Daqqa, 13, in the abdomen as he was playing near his home in ‘Abasan al Kabira, hundreds of meters from the fighting.’

(19) = guardian.co.uk 05 Nov 2008 ‘Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians  ; 3^rd and 4^th paragraphs ‘Israeli troops crossed into the Gaza Strip late last night near the town of Deir al-Balah…Four Israeli soldiers were injured in the operation, two moderately and two lightly, the military said….One Hamas gunman was killed and Palestinians launched a volley of mortars at the Israeli military. An Israeli air strike then killed five more Hamas fighters. In response, Hamas launched 35 rockets into southern Israel, one reaching the city of Ashkelon.’

(20) = BBC News 24 Oct 2012 ‘Gaza militants killed in strikes following rocket fire’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20054554 ; ‘Two members of the groups were killed in an Israeli air strike on Monday. The Israeli military said it had targeted the militants after they fired mortars at a ground patrol. Palestinian sources said the patrol had entered Gaza near Beit Hanoun…’

(21) = Human Rights Watch 15 Nov 2012 ‘Israel/Gaza: Avoid Harm to Civilians’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/11/15/israelgaza-avoid-harm-civilians

(22) = Al Jazeera 14 Nov 2012 ‘Israel and Gaza reach tacit truce’,
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/11/2012111316357186271.html
‘Israel and Palestinian leaders have reached a tacit truce that could prevent a new war in the Gaza strip after five days of clashes.The agreement, brokered by Egypt, was made on Monday night…. Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister of Gaza's Hamas government, praised the main armed factions in the occupied Palestinian territory for agreeing to the truce.

Israel struck three targets in the Gaza Strip in the early hours of Tuesday, including what the army said was a weapons depot and two rocket launch sites. There were no casualties. Only one Palestinian rocket strike was reported in Israel by 0800 GMT on Tuesday.’

(23) = USA Today 14 Nov 2012 ‘Israelis brace for attacks after Hamas leader killed’,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/11/14/israeli-airstrike-hamas-military-chief/1704159/

(24) = Haaretz 14 Nov 2012 ‘Israel killed its subcontractor in Gaza’,
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-killed-its-subcontractor-in-gaza.premium-1.477886

(25) = New York Times 16 Nov 2012 ‘Israel’s short-sighted assassination’ by Gerwin Bashkin,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/opinion/israels-shortsighted-assassination.html?pagewanted=1

(26) = See (25) above

(27) = Huffington Post 18 Nov 2012 ‘Gershon Baskin, Israeli Activist, Explains Truce Plan Given To Ahmed Jabari Before Gaza War’ , http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/17/gershon-baskin_n_2152231.html

(28) = guardian.co.uk 22 Nov 2009 ‘Gaza militant groups agree to stop firing rockets into Israel’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/22/gaza-militant-groups-rockets-israel ; ‘Hamas has won an agreement from other militant groups in Gaza to halt rocket fire into Israel for the first time in almost a year, as both sides indicated progress on a deal to release a captured Israeli soldier.’

(29) = Haaretz 12 April 2010 ‘Gaza militant: Hamas stopping rocket fire into Israel’,
http://www.haaretz.com/news/gaza-militant-hamas-stopping-rocket-fire-into-israel-1.284117 ; ‘Hamas is forcing other Gaza Palestinian factions to guarantee they do not launch rockets or mortar bombs at Israel, a source told the French AFP news agency on Monday. ..a member of the Strip's Islamic Jihad militant group, told AFP that members of Hamas' security force arrested four Islamic Jihad militants, forcing them to sign a document stating that they pledged not to fire Qassam missiles or mortar bombs at Israel.The official added that the Hamas men also confiscated the weapons found on the Islamic Jihad militants. Last week, Hamas spokesman Ayman Taha told the BBC that Hamas was working to curb rocket attacks against Israel by Gaza militants.’

(30) = Al Arabiya 07 Aug 2011 ‘Hamas arrests Salafists for firing rockets into Israel’,
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/08/07/161181.html ; ‘Hamas security forces in the Gaza Strip on Saturday detained two members of an Islamist group suspected of firing rockets at Israel, the group said in a statement. Tawhid wal Jihad, a Salafist organization, confirmed that Hamas security forces had detained two of its members in an early morning raid. …The group acknowledged that the arrested members were part of a group firing missiles from Gaza, confirming earlier reports that Hamas forces had detained fighters who have fired dozens of missiles into Israel this month….In the statement, the group warned that it would continue to fire rockets at Israel….“We urge the police not to heed the decision of the government to stop the holy warriors and protect the defenses of the enemy against the holy warriors’ attacks,” the statement added.’

(31) = Forward 09 Feb 2007 ‘Experts Question Wisdom of Boycotting Hamas’, http://forward.com/articles/10055/experts-question-wisdom-of-boycotting-hamas/#ixzz2D0Wye642 ; 16^th paragraph ‘According to Halevy, Israel should take up Hamas’s offer of a long-term truce and try negotiating, because the Islamic movement is respected by Palestinians and generally keeps its word. He pointed to the cease-fire in attacks on Israel that Hamas declared two years ago and has largely honored. “They’re not very pleasant people, but they are very, very credible,” Halevy said.’

(32) = ‘http://forward.com/articles/10055/experts-question-wisdom-of-boycotting-hamas/#ixzz2D0Xvm0Jo ; 2nd sentence of 15th paragraph , ‘“It may not work, but aren’t we strong enough to be able to try it?” said onetime Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy, who was a top adviser to former prime ministers Yitzhak Shamir and Ariel Sharon.’

(33) = Ehud Barak in an interview published in Haaretz newspaper 18 June 1999 , cited by Avi Shlaim (2000) ‘The Iron Wall :Israel and the Arab World’ , Penguin paperback , London, 2001 , page xii