The latest Israeli "proposal", first proposed in February of 1992, contains 
the following assumptions concerning the nature of any "interim status" 
refering to the WB and Gaza, the Palestinians, implemented by negotiations.
It states that:    
   >Israel will remain the existing source of authority until "final status"
    is agreed upon;
   >Israel will negiotiate the delegation of power to the organs of the 
    Interim Self-Government Arrangements (ISGA);
   >The ISGA will apply to the "Palestinian inhabitants of the territories"
    under Israeli military administration. The arrangements will not have a 
    territorial application, nor will they apply to the Israeli population 
    of the territories or to the Palestinian inhabitants of Jerusalem;
   >Residual powers not delegated under the ISGA will be reserved by Israel;
   >Israelis will continue to live and settle in the territoriesd;
   >Israel alone will have responsibility for security in all its aspects-
    external, internal- and for the maintenance of public order;
   >The organs of the ISGA will be of an administrative-functional nature;
   >The exercise of powers under the ISGA will be subject to cooperation and 
    coordination with Israel. 
   >Israel will negotiate delegation of powers and responsibilities in the 
    areas of administration, justice, personnel, agriculture, education,
    business, tourism, labor and social welfare, local police,
    local transportation and communications, municipal affairs and religious
    affairs.

Several question do come to mind concerning the "success" we all hope for 
in the ongoing negotiation process. These arrangements certainly seem to 
be essentially a rejection of any Palestinian "interim" self-control. 
Without exposing itself to unwarranted risks and creating irresversible 
vulnerability, can Israel reasonably put forward (at later points in the 
negotiating process) more "relaxed" proposals for this"interim" period? 
How should proposals (from either side) be altered to temper their 
"maximalist" approaches as stated above? How can Israeli worries ,and 
desire for some "interim control", be addressed while providing for a  
very *real* interim Palestinian self-governing entity?

Tim



