[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 18626]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               EARMARK REGIONAL ASSETS FOR MIDEAST PEACE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 14, 2004

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of the 
Members of the House a newspaper article written by my constituent, 
Steven R. Rivkin, which was originally published on the Financial Times 
website on June 4th 2004. This piece offers some interesting, pragmatic 
and innovative views on how the natural resources in the Middle East 
can be used to help advance President Bush's stalled Greater Middle 
East Initiative.

                [From the Financial Times, June 4, 2004]

               Earmark RegionaL Assets for Mideast Peace

                         (By Steven R. Rivkin)

       Palestinian and Israeli claims for lost properties 
     unsettled for more than five decades can still be remedied 
     through sufficient compensation.
       That's what an American friend of mine received after the 
     US Army pulled a truck up to his idyllic New Mexico home 
     early in the second world war and removed his family so the 
     property could be used as a weapons development laboratory. 
     His parents got a monthly cheque, enabling him to become well 
     educated, live a comfortable life, and make worthy 
     contributions to the US.
       And that's precisely the type of assurance for individual 
     Palestinians that Jordan's King Abdullah II has now asked of 
     the White House, once President George W. Bush acquiesced 
     when Ariel Sharon ruled out a ``Right of Return'' to the 
     Israeli heartland.
       There's a simple, just, and pragmatic way to launch 
     compensation that the Middle East ``peace process'' has yet 
     to appreciate: Recognise that there are rich regional 
     resources lying fallow since the break-up of mandatory 
     Palestine that could be earmarked to settle outstanding 
     claims.
       Clearly delineated stakes in the region's strategic wealth 
     could be pledged up front as collateral for individual 
     recoveries. This would ease qualms over whether reparations 
     would ever be paid and promote confidence that other 
     impediments to peace can fairly be resolved too.
       A lot of economic value resides in at least three regional 
     advantages untapped since 1948:
       Trans-Israel transport of goods and commodities to and from 
     Jordan and beyond. Transit via Israel's ports and networks of 
     roads and rail (themselves legacies from the Mandate) could 
     expand mineral production (potash and phosphates) in the Arab 
     hinterland and trigger significant economic growth in the 
     desert kingdom. An Israeli ``land bridge to Jordan'' would 
     set off significant efficiencies in world commerce, by 
     passing the Suez Canal.
       What is more, the British built a petroleum pipeline in the 
     1930s from Mosul, Iraq, to the Mediterranean at Haifa, which 
     has not functioned since Israel's independence. If restored 
     now, this pipeline could provide critically needed, added 
     security for exporting Iraqi oil to western markets.
       A large natural gas field recently discovered in the 
     Mediterranean off Gaza, Egypt, and Israel could fuel 
     electricity production, habitation, and manufacturing in all 
     three areas and beyond.
       In each case, idle resources could be made to earn 
     substantial and growing revenue for owners, investors, and 
     lenders. If claimants for reparations were firmly recognised 
     as equity owners, dividends could be paid to them out of 
     revenue. Were ownership rights ``securitised'', some owners 
     could ``cash out'' whenever they decided to sell their equity 
     to third-party investors.
       Israel's current control over these assets is of minimal 
     worth until regional co-operation is assured. Yet the real 
     value of these dormant assets can be far greater if they 
     bring a conclusive settlement within reach. So the loss would 
     be merely conjectural, overwhelmingly offset by long-term 
     gains through conciliation and many more economic 
     opportunities that would surely unfold.
       For Palestinians, recovery of a productive share in what 
     they could see as their historic patrimony would be 
     psychologically fitting and a spur to regional stability, 
     offsetting longing for specific properties lost long ago. 
     Israel, Palestine, and their Arab neighbours Egypt, Jordan, 
     Lebanon, and Syria could all look forward to regional 
     prosperity based on indigenous resources--positioned like my 
     New Mexico friend when he lost his home in 1942, only to find 
     the courage, supported by the means, to live a full and 
     productive life. Israel could consider turning key selected 
     assets over to a third-party trustee--say a corporation 
     chartered and guaranteed by the US or European Union under 
     protocols specifying that individual shares held in the names 
     of eligible claimants will start paying dividends as soon as 
     earnings flow (rather like preferred stock). Once currently 
     unused assets have been earmarked, Israel's neighbours might 
     be much less reluctant to initiate co-operative development 
     projects.
       Having moved this one critical grievance up and out of the 
     queue, negotiators could turn to other key issues--borders, 
     Jerusalem, water rights, even limited repatriation whether or 
     not production gets going right away.
       If the assets transferred wind up being lucrative, astute 
     international mediation and private entrepreneurship will 
     have removed a prominent barrier to reconciliation that is 
     not only real but innately personal. Then, the natural 
     workings of global capital and commodity markets could, over 
     time, top up the monetary restitution.
       This is an issue better taken up immediately rather than 
     left any longer to fester just in time to give new impetus to 
     Mr Bush's stalled ``Greater Middle East Initiative.''
       This writer is a lawyer in Washington, DC. From 1961-65 he 
     worked for the White House Staff & Office of Science & 
     Technology.

                          ____________________