Re: Our Marshall Plan & Constitution for Gaza

Dear Reader;

I know your time is valuable so I’ll get right to the point: it’s unfortunate, but evil and terrorism have become global plagues, plagues that need to be eradicated immediately. These two plagues are can pop up anywhere, are morally and sociologically expensive, and take their toll on our time, energy, money and resources. And yes, they unfortunately also take lives. Because of the nature of regional middle east nation’s and their relations to terror based groups, the world must deal with an important part of the puzzle, and its one that must addressed if we are to successfully rebuild Gaza and eradicate terrorism. To accomplish this, www.WhatsNextForGaza.org  believes that the best way to do this is by answering the following economic questions:

•       In war, is there ever a real winner?
•       In this day and age, what really wins “The Peace?”
•       Will the war on terror be won with weapons, or do we need to create economic hope and opportunities as alternatives?
•       At what point in an armed conflict do you develop plans that answer this question: What happens once the fighting is over?

As this ideological war develops and nations start to converse, someone needs to be brave enough to roll up their sleeves and put a proposal on the table that not only fosters the conversation process, but also helps the rebuilding process. This paper is the first start in that conversation because it develops, discusses, funds and implements two things that are missing: A Constitution and a plan. This paper starts that process, laying a variety of issues and concepts on the table for discussion, along with a projected, variable price tag. Combined, the ideas expressed here are designed to solve the core reasons for regional discontent and terrorism: hunger, unemployment, tyrants, disease, illiteracy, censorship and poverty.

With that in mind, I’d like to ask you this question: Has anyone planned for what comes next for Gaza, once the war against terrorism is won? 

As developers of this paper, the WNFGC’s plan captures a bold and direct vision that answers those questions and more. We have entitled it “A Constitution & Economic Plan For Gaza.”

We hope our work not only captures the spirit of cooperation and partnership, but is used as a ‘tool’ that jumpstarts a conversation about how to create positive and cohesive regional economic policies that create jobs and spur domestic and international market places. This document incorporates the following belief(s):

•      As we sit down and talk, this document will become a “living document,” evolving as support and ideas come forward;
•      Many countries lack specific needs assessment tools and we will help develop and fund them;
•      All religions believe that war is wrong, life is precious and man should live as brothers in peace;
•      War wastes money, time and resources, in the long run – peace is more profitable than war; 
•      Gaza and the Middle East region has one of the highest in the world and that calls for economic investment that will benefit everyone;
•      Creating jobs will help bring peace to the region by slowing down or eliminating the frustration and hate that leads to terrorism; 
•      Many believe that “idle hands are the devil’s playground,” tying terrorism directly to the unemployment rate; 
•      Good, hard, solid work is the most effective way to restore a man’s dignity and defeat the roots of terrorism;
•      In the future, any plan for war is negligent if it doesn’t include a plan for cleanup, redevelopment or winning economic & social peace;

Unfortunately, though, the toughest task that this document’s faces is not determining how much money to raise, or which projects are viable, but establishing specific monetary values and goals that ensure quality and best value for the money. Based on projections, the project’s estimated price tag is $153 Billion. Over a 10 year period, this equates to about $5 B per tier one country, about $2.5 B per tier two country and about $1 B per tier 3 country. When compared to the $13 Billion the USA spent on the Marshall Plan after WWII, the price tag is miniscule, but based on the fact that it saves lives and brings economic peace to the region, it accomplishes a lot. In today’s dollars, America’s 1949 investment equates to about $130B, making today’s per country contribution just over 1/2^th that figure. Overall, this proposal is cost effective using today’s dollars. And, for the record, if this project accomplishes ½ of what we expect, not only will it save lives through peace, but it will educate the masses, create economic partnerships and put food on the table for millions all while rebuilding the region and fostering economic cooperation and peace. Overall, these actions will slow down and/or eliminate terrorism – And that’s a well balanced and affordable investment in peace that everyone can afford. 

Finally, this document approaches the problem of terrorism from a different direction – through economics. As such, we present a variety of philosophic challenges and discussion topics. Each one comes complete with narrative, goals and objectives, projected financial awards and needs. The most important philosophic challenges include:

•      We know this paper will raise a lot of questions and we want to answer them all – so ask them;
•      Redeveloping a region of the world where terrorists destroy what’s there, what’s being created or what’s planned;
•      Identification of clear and definable goals and objectives;
•      An overview of the hearings, awards and implementation process has been established;
•      Committees will define and establish award criteria based on quantifiable results;
•      Descriptions and financial program outlines have been created for each segment we plan to fund;
•      Projects will be developed in two arenas: First, what the committee believes is needed in the region (based on professional recommendations and studies). Second, by what the specific requests.
•      Understanding that money can be awarded, but won’t unless the project meets established standards or needs;
•      This proposal is an alternative and less expensive ways to defeat terrorism. 

     Thank you for your time, I look forward to hearing from you personally.

     Michael Ross