The peace deal: falling on deaf ears
At this point, unfortunately, Israel/Palestine peace plans are not enormous news for the simple reason that there’s no reason to believe that any such plan, however brilliant, could succeed.
But Trump has tried to devise one, as have many presidents before him:
The Jerusalem Post summarized the main of the deal:
“The Trump plan would allow Israel to retain about 20% of the West Bank. Israel would be called upon to cede some land in the south near Egypt’s border with Gaza. The plan also leaves open the possibility that Israel could cede the Triangle — three Arab cities in the Galilee — to a future Palestinian state, subject to negotiations between the parties.”
Israel will be allowed to keep 15 communities as “enclaves” within the future Palestinian state. Israel would be responsible for their security.
Under the plan there could be a Palestinian state in four years if the Palestinians meet certain conditions. The total area of the state would encompass about 70% of the West Bank, including what is termed Areas A and B.
More at the link.
The Palestinian response? A thousand “no’s”.
Which was to be expected:
The original Israeli-Palestinian peace accord was signed by Israel and the PLO. The P.A. was created as a function of the 1993 agreement, a later agreement in 1994 and finally the 1995 interim agreement. These agreements are together known as the “Oslo Accords.”
In those agreements a number of issues were left to “permanent status negotiations,” including “Jerusalem, settlements, specified military locations, Palestinian refugees, borders, foreign relations and Israelis.”
Despite having agreed to negotiate on these subjects, over the last 25 years, on repeated occasions, the PLO/PA have made clear that while they were happy to assume the control and jurisdiction afforded to them by the accords, they had no intention whatsoever to negotiate any settlement regarding the other issues…
The PLO/PA stance on Jerusalem is unequivocal. According to them, Jerusalem, especially but not limited to the Temple Mount, is holy Islamic territory that no terrestrial body has the right to forfeit to non-Islamic rule…
Any peace deal that suggests leaving any part of Jerusalem, including but not limited to the Western Wall Plaza, under non-P.A./Islamic jurisdiction will be rejected…
According to the PLO/PA, any peace accord that does not ensure the dismantling of every “settlement,” including multiple neighborhoods in Jerusalem, and the expulsion of every Israeli from those areas…will be rejected…
In its definition of “Palestinian refugees,” UNRWA includes all descendants of Palestine refugee males, including legally adopted children, regardless of whether they have been granted citizenship elsewhere. Based on this definition, there are 5,545,540 Palestinian “refugees” registered with UNRWA.
When one includes the spouses and children of the female refugees (who inherited their refugee status from their fathers but cannot pass it down to their children unless they married a male Palestinian refugee), it is reasonable to assume that the PLO/PA is demanding that Israel agree to absorb a Palestinian refugee population comprising no fewer than 7.5 million people.
Needless to say, absorbing this number of Palestinians would fundamentally change Israel’s demographics—there are just over 6 million Jews in Israel today. The PLO/PA understand that the influx of these refugees would signal the end of the democratic Jewish state.
Any peace plan that requires the PLO/PA to compromise on the subject of the Palestinian refugees will be rejected.
There’s much much more at the link, but you get the idea.
In fact, you probably got the idea many years ago, as did I.
With Trump, though, the outline of any deal is usually just the tip of the iceberg. There is almost certainly other pressure being applied, although not necessarily directly to the Palestinians; perhaps to their all-important alllies.
And speaking of allies of the Palestinians:
“So many other countries are willing, ready and able to work with us. I’ve spoken to many of them. I cannot believe the amount of support this morning has,” President Trump said. “I have been called by leaders – Boris called – and they’re all saying whatever we can do to help, we all want to see it happen.”
The deal also found surprising backers in the Middle East, with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates coming out in support. Turkey and Iran were among the leading opponents of the deal among the Muslim countries.
Actually, the backing of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Ara Emirates is not surprising at all; in recent years they have taken this stance. And with the election of Boris Johnson, Trump has a much stronger ally in Britain than before.
That said, I just don’t think this plan has a chance no matter what it says. What happened at Camp David two decades ago revealed for all to see that the Palestinians want nothing but the destruction of Israel and no concessions but that will ever be enough. As long as they are being supported in this holdout – and especially, as long as they are propped up financially by the UN and their other sponsors (although the US is no longer among those sponsors) – they will continue to say a thousand no’s. Perhaps they would even continue without that financial support, because the Palestinian leaders do not care about the well-being of their people.
But this is one of the things on which I’d like to be proven wrong.
Professor Moshe Sharon
The veteran expert on Islam says that Western officials fail to grasp that the Arab and Islamic world truly see Israel’s establishment as a “reversal of history” and are therefore unable to ever accept peaceful relations with it. From Moslems’ perspective, “Islamic territory was taken away from Islam by Jews. You know by now that this can never be accepted, not even one meter. So everyone who thinks Tel Aviv is safe is making a grave mistake. Territory which at one time was dominated by Islamic rule, now has become non-Muslim. Non-Muslims are independent of Islamic rule and Jews have created their own independent state. It is anathema. Worse, Israel, a non-Muslim state, is ruling over Muslims. It is unthinkable that non-Muslims should rule over Muslims.”
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/112066
Follow the money. Who pays the “palis”? If the Saudis who have been paying these guys to make trouble stop, who pays them? They are not in it for ideals, but loot. If Iran is supporting them, choking off Iran’s loot is a double blessing. As long as someone paid to kill Jews, they were happy. If someone pays to not kill Jews (Saudi) they will be happy.
Gaza is a problem, but just give it back to Egypt.
Expert on Islam: “What Muslim Leaders Say in English Means Absolutely Nothing”
Professor Moshe Sharon explains what Trump needs to say to Abbas during their upcoming meeting; why a nuclear Iran is so dangerous; and why the West has trouble understanding the Muslim world
https://en.mida.org.il/2017/05/02/expert-islam-muslim-leaders-say-english-means-absolutely-nothing/
It appears that to the feasible extent possible the Israeli gov’t is going to implement favorable elements of the peace plan in law, creating a fait accompli while the Palestinians dither. That’s a bad idea on the Palistinians’ part, I think, letting the strategic initiative go. But this seems their habit longstanding.
I saw a comment on another site saying that this peace deal is going to fail, but that it is important for Israel and the West to keep proposing new peace deals every few years.
The left keeps wanting to cast Israel as the aggressor/bad guy. The peace deals help push back on that, even if they never come to fruition.
The Arab support is not surprising for those of us who have been paying attention, but I think a lot of people haven’t.
I agree this is the tip of the iceberg.
It seems to me that what’s new here is the attempt to call the bluff of the Palestinians — they are running a shakedown scheme, and everybody knows it, but nobody wants to admit it. I think the strategy is to get the world to acknowledge that the Palestinians really do not want a state. They will do anything they can to keep from getting one! Pretending otherwise has, in a certain sense, been the biggest obstacle.
I think Trump and his team (I wish I knew more about who is making the good decisions lately!) are playing a long game here, and that this is just the first move. We now have a public coalition of Arabs not just working together with the US and Israel, but agreeing in advance to what they think seems fair. I expect that will provide a much more stable platform for whatever comes next.
The peaceful majority doesn’t matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s
Pushback? What did Israel get from withdrawing completely from Gaza.
Just another reason for the Democrats to get Trump out of the White House?….
Palestinian rules!
“If you want to understand the true obstacle to Mideast peace, look no further than the Jordanian parliament’s unanimous approval last week of a bill to ban natural-gas imports from Israel, just days after the gas began arriving”…
The Jordanian vote is a reminder that hatred is strong and peace is fragile. If would-be peacemakers don’t start confronting this hatred rather than pretending it doesn’t exist, long-term prospects for peace are dim. And in the meantime, any treaty will have to include defensible borders.
https://evelyncgordon.com/jordanian-vote-shows-why-defensible-borders-still-matter/
The problem with giving Gaza back to Egypt is that Egypt doesn’t want it, either.
I doubt the PLO/Hamas will accept this deal, since peace is not what they want. Sdferr, above, is probably right. Israel will implement those aspects of this plan which are favorable to it, and then next time a “peace plan” is offered, it will contain less for the PLO/Hamas than this one does.
For those who want to know the legal case for Israel, this is a “Must Watch”
https://www.torahcafe.com/professor-eugene-kontorovich/the-legal-case-for-israel-video_33fb484b5.html
The problem, which became brutally evident nineteen years ago, and which can be understood from examining survey research of the Arab population on the West Bank and Gaza, is that perhaps 1/3 of the Arab population in these areas would like a settlement with Israel. North of 1/3 insist that it is non-negotiable that Israel cease to exist. About 30% are willing to ratify a settlement with a corporate entity called ‘Israel’, but insist it is non-negotiable that a seven-digit population of Arabs be allowed to settle in Israel at their discretion. You take stances like this when you’re in a position to dictate terms to your enemy. Since 1920, the Arabs have never been in such a position, and since the foundation of UNRWA in 1949, the rest of the world has been willing to supply them with sustenance which inhibits them from forming an honest appraisal of their actual situation. As is, they’d prefer to pretend rather than make practical improvements in their situation. Which is their problem.
The problem with giving Gaza back to Egypt is that Egypt doesn’t want it, either.
Why should they? It was never a juridical part of Egypt, about 50% of the personal income flow in the territory consists of UNRWA doles, the population there is politically obnoxious, and you can tell from listening to them that they are not Egyptian Arabs and they are not of the Bedouin communities on the Sinai which have been appended to Egypt for over a century.
If the Saudi’s paid the Egyptians enough I am sure they would love to clean out a nest of snakes next to their border. No one cares about arab on arab killing (see Yemen, Syria, Iraq). So giving Gaza back to Egypt solves several problems.
Egypt could pretend they were providing border security for the palis, so Hamas would not need any weapons. That stops the rockets. With Gaza under Egyptian control there is no need for a physical connect with Gaza and the west bank. Hamas dies. A win-win-win.
I hope that over time some of the Palis start to listen to the investment offers and try to start their own businesses that give jobs to others. When the Iranian money stops flowing to Hamas, they may get hungry. Of course, it won’t happen tomorrow.
Art Deco, what you say is exactly what I heard from (Muslim) Egyptians when I lived there. They didn’t want anything to do with Gaza. The Gazans were considered troublemakers. When Egypt ruled Gaza for a while, it was uncaring and rather brutal.
Cut the money from Iran, the UN and other sources and the Palestinians would be eager for the deal, IMO.
The only other thing that might matter is if they learn to love their children more than they hate Israel.
Not holding my breath on either one happening soon.
The Palestinians never miss a chance to miss a chance.
But this time Israel doesn’t care.
Every time the Palestinians reject a deal, the next deal that is offered provides less for them than the one they rejected.
Notice too that WALLS WORK!
So giving Gaza back to Egypt solves several problems.
It solves no problem. Egypt occupied Gaza from 1948 to 1967. They held it for 19 years, haven’t held it for 52 years. Again, the occupants speak a vernacular on the Levantine spectrum and have no particular association with Egypt other than Egypt was a governing authority there consequent to the vicissitudes of battle during Israel’s War of Independence. They aren’t loyal to Egypt and have no notable affinity for Egypt other than they are an Arab population.
If Syria ever rebuilds its civil society, the optimal solution might be to incorporate Gaza as a self-governing dependency of Syria and for the West Bank to have a similar status. Allowing Gazans Syrian citizenship and a franchise to relocate to Syria for work might allow the surplus population to go where the jobs are and the residual population to develop an actual labor market rather than a spot market supplementing the UNRWA dole. Of course, the whole idea is an eschatological concept right now.
“The PLO/PA stance on Jerusalem is unequivocal. According to them, Jerusalem, especially but not limited to the Temple Mount, is holy Islamic territory that no terrestrial body has the right to forfeit to non-Islamic rule…” Maurice Hirsch
NO, according to Allah, who has declared in the ‘sacred’ Qur’an that, once land is Muslim it MUST forever remain part of the Ummah, i.e. Muslim.
That is a theological imperative Entrance into Allah’s ‘paradise’ is conditional upon Muslim’s accepting of that command and working unrelentingly toward correcting any violation by non-Muslims of that command.
BTW, that theological imperative applies to ALL of Israel.
Plus, ongoing indoctrination of young Muslim generations into Islam’s tenets ensures that the murderous aggression will continue… until Israel fully faces up to the situation and takes effective action.
You gain leverage over an enemy by directly attaching to their actions, what for them is intolerable consequence.
Neo
With due respect to what you stated in the last paragraph here, let remember there are many UN resolutions and also international law, a territory is considered “occupied” when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army and other things which is ignored with this proposal by President trump peace plan.
Both parties failed to find common ground to settle their differences despite each one have his argument about his rights on the land.
let read:
The Myth of Annihilation and the Six-Day War
Who Started the Six Day War of June 1967?
How the Israeli Generals Prepared The Conquest Long Before 1967
Geoffrey Britain on January 29, 2020 at 7:41 pm said:
The same argument by Israelit, Holly Hebrew/Torah book and Promise Land from G-God to Jewish people.
Occupation under international law?
https://www.diakonia.se/globalassets/documents/ihl/ihl-resources-center/fact-sheets/occupation-under-international-law.pdf
The solution may just be time. As Spengler points out, once the Palestinian population ages out, there won’t be any more war, the converse of the European saying, there are lots of young men, there’s a war coming.
https://pjmedia.com/spengler/the-palestinian-problem-is-dying-of-natural-causes/
Israelis were warned on illegality of settlements in 1967 memo
The Historians’ War Over the Six-Day War
A lot of good comments here.
I observed to my wife this morning that, in response to this deal – and the vociferous Palestinian rejection – I’d expect President Trump to make it clear that this was the best deal they’d ever get, and that any newer deal would leave them wishing for this one.
My wife pointed out to me (as Edward points out above) that this has been true for some time. In 1967, Moshe Dayan was ready to offer just about the entire West Bank, in return for a peace deal. This was vehemently rejected. Some years later, Israel shrugged and started building modern Israeli towns in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (and in the Sinai, and in the Golan Heights). The Palestinians objected mightily to this, causing Israelis to say “you should have accepted what we offered you years ago”. Occasionally, an act of brutal Palestinian terror resulted in a new Israeli community established on the site of the terror attack, often named for the victims… which Palestinians likewise objected to mightily. (You can probably imagine the Israeli response.)
And so the land claimable by the Palestinians keeps shrinking. They continue to insist on impossible conditions… and meanwhile, their longtime sponsors and supporters seem to be tiring of them.
We have heard for years that time is not on Israel’s side… but that’s not true. Israel has built an economic powerhouse out of practically nothing, and the world has grown dependent on Israeli products and inventions. Israel has even become, at long last, an energy exporter. Upon what Palestinian products does the world depend?
The Palestinians are playing a losing game… and, increasingly, they seem to know it. This deal just makes it obvious.
Revealed, the war before the Six Day War
Daniel Schwartz on January 29, 2020 at 8:44 pm said:
The Palestinians are playing a losing game…
Not just the Palestinians, all Arab, as those regimes for more than 60 years claimed that they will get back Palestine…
And we saw what they did more distraction and wars to their nations.
There was also miss the opportunity after 1948 with UN resolution split small portion of land for the Jews and a big part for the Palestinians
Art Deco:
Gaza “Palestinians” become Syrians? Why should they bother when then can just move to Germany? Didn’t the “Palestinians” already try Jordan and Lebanon? April 1st is a few months off.
Israelis were warned on illegality of settlements in 1967 memo
This is a nonsense statement.
Not just the Palestinians, all Arab, as those regimes for more than 60 years claimed that they will get back Palestine…
Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979 and Jordan did in 1994. The Christian factions in Lebanon would be content to do so.
Some have contended
The correct phrase is ‘there has even been speculation’
apnews post: “Protesters burned tires and pictures of President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”
Has Greta ever figured out the carbon footprint of the Palestinians?
If they agreed to peace, we could end global warming!
BTW, ICYMI
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/greta-thunberg-files-trademark-for-her-name-and-movement
Sarah Rolph on January 29, 2020 at 2:15 pm said:
The Arab support is not surprising for those of us who have been paying attention, but I think a lot of people haven’t.
* * *
LI shows who supports the plan, and who doesn’t.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/01/mixed-reaction-to-trump-middle-east-peace-plan-in-europe/
Hen Mazzig
@HenMazzig
UPDATED reactions to Trump’s Palestine plan so far:
IN FAVOUR
• Britain
• Israel
• Egypt
• UAE
• Saudi Arabia
• Oman
OPPOSITION
• Turkey
• Palestinian Authority
• Iran
• Yemen
AGNOSTICS
• EU
• Qatar
11:54 PM – Jan 28, 2020
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/01/trumps-middle-east-peace-deal-what-does-it-mean/
Mark Dubowitz
@mdubowitz
Interesting.
Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Egypt support Middle East peace plan.
Sanders, Warren & ten other Democratic senators do not.
https://twitter.com/ChrisVanHollen/status/1222306072737779712 …
Senator Chris Van Hollen
@ChrisVanHollen
Trump’s one-sided plan is a recipe for even deeper division and undermines efforts to achieve a viable and sustainable two-state solution that supports the legitimate rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.
Our Senate letter to President Trump:
(View image on Twitter to see the signatures, which include Sanders, Warren, Klobuchar and 7 others)
5:50 PM – Jan 28, 2020
NOTE: the block function isn’t working for the cut-and-pasted excerpts.
Both parties failed to find common ground to settle their differences despite each one have his argument about his rights on the land.
1. The Arab governments, meeting in Khartoum in 1967, refused to countenance any settlement with Israel.
2. Israel attempted local devolution by holding municipal elections on the West Bank and Gaza in 1972 and 1976. The local population elected revanchists.
3. Egypt and Israel signed the Camp David Accords in the fall of 1978, accords which provided for an autonomous local authority on the West Bank and Gaza. The PLO had a lunatic reaction to the preliminaries of this and rejected it tout court.
4. Israel and the PLO concluded the Oslo accords in 1993. Much of the Israeli political spectrum was dubious about the accords but elected by 1996 to work within their framework. Over the next seven years, you have a parallel process of incremental concessions by Israel while the PLO develops criminal syndicates on the West Bank and in Gaza (e.g. car theft rings). There is a decline in the level of public order in Israel. By 2000, the Clinton administration calls a summit to hammer out a final settlement. The PLO abandons the summit and launches the 2d intifada, a years long terror campaign which costs more than 1,000 lives in Israel.
5. Israel unilaterally withdraws from Gaza. Local Arabs seize and destroy horticultural facilities left to them. The new de facto authority in Gaza begins to appropriate international aid to set up artillery and build infiltration tunnels.
6. General elections in the West Bank and Gaza. A plurality is won by Hamas, who make their dispositions toward Israel quite unambiguous. Another bloc of votes is won by a red-brown collection of parties who have a different idiom from that of Hamas, but agree on certain outcomes.
7. Ehud Olmert calls a summit with Mahmoud Abbas. The previous history of negotiations in mind (where the response to concessions by Israel had been demands for more concessions), he unrolls a map and gives Abbas a take-it-or-leave it offer of the whole of the West Bank and Gaza. Abbas rejects the offer.
“Both parties…common ground” is a smarmy formulation.
https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/The-Trump-Plan-How-Israel-Should-Respond-615681
As to that last point, the proposed map really bothers me.
I would be very concerned about having the Palestinian State-let areas intermixed to such a great degree with Israel, and the tunnel for me would be a deal-breaker. Despite its appeal, that presumably being that there would be limited surface transport across Israeli land between the two Pali sections, unauthorized extensions under Israeli territory are a foregone conclusion, even though I’m sure it will be heavily monitored.
FB,
I merely related the reason WHY the militant ‘Palestinian’ Muslims refuse to accept any peace plan.
Since Israel has sincerely offered many peace plans… clearly their belief that Israel is the Promised Land granted from God to the Jewish people is NOT the same as Allah’s command that once land is part of the Ummah it must forever remain so.
Nor does Allah tolerate democracy, so Jews have no vote in a Muslim society. Whereas, the average Muslim has a better life in Israel than they do in any Muslim dominated society. Muslims serve in the Knesset, please provide an example of the reverse…
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/This-peace-plan-comes-with-a-map-why-is-this-significant-analysis-615692
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/US-President-Donald-Trump-presents-his-Deal-of-the-Century-615690
Ya know, this really is yuge.
But the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
If you want to hear the opposition’s side –
https://www.vox.com/2020/1/28/21083615/trump-peace-plan-map-netanyahu-israel-palestine
However, it does have some good maps and (sort of, if you ignore the spin) history. Most notable is what it leaves out.
Side-by-side maps, very useful.
https://www.jta.org/2020/01/28/israel/trumps-israeli-palestinian-peace-plan-runs-181-pages-these-2-maps-tell-you-what-you-need-to-know
Addresses one of my concerns bruited above, but only on its technological feasibility, not any security considerations.
https://www.jta.org/2020/01/29/israel/trumps-middle-east-peace-plan-has-99-problems-but-israeli-engineers-say-a-tunnel-aint-one
“And so the land claimable by the Palestinians keeps shrinking. They continue to insist on impossible conditions… and meanwhile, their longtime sponsors and supporters seem to be tiring of them. …
The Palestinians are playing a losing game… and, increasingly, they seem to know it. This deal just makes it obvious.”- Daniel Schwarz
Indeed.
Paul in Boston on January 29, 2020 at 8:28 pm said:
The solution may just be time. As Spengler points out, once the Palestinian population ages out, there won’t be any more war, the converse of the European saying, there are lots of young men, there’s a war coming.
https://pjmedia.com/spengler/the-palestinian-problem-is-dying-of-natural-causes/
* * *
Spengler talks about the June 2019 plan introduced at Bahrain.
It was instructive to me to compare the reports about its provisions to this new plan. That was the first deal; Trump has already altered it.
You can finish the quote.
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2019/0524/Mideast-peace-plan-s-rocky-start-Did-US-misread-Arab-politics
https://wben.radio.com/articles/ap-news/bahrain-conference-peace-critical-us-plan-mideast-0
https://www.vox.com/2019/6/25/18744323/bahrain-kushner-middle-east-peace-plan-israel-palestine
Biggest take-away: the nay-sayers got the political solution they asked for because it’s the only way to make the economic solution work.
The Palestinian birth rate in the ‘occupied’ territories is 4.1 children per woman. In 2040 there will be more 20 to 24 year olds than there were in 2010. Concluding that demographics will reduce Palestinian ‘resistance’ is it best problematic.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1222513504156114946.html
https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/01/29/the-deal-of-the-century-notes-on-the-map-and-security/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/trump-israeli-palestinian-peace-plan-much-needed-dose-of-reality/
I wish NR wouldn’t pickup stuff that I did not block to copy.
Just a bit of news out of context here
Inside the factory that makes flags for Iranians to BURN https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7900545/Inside-factory-makes-flags-Iranians-BURN.html?ito=amp_whatsapp_share-top
“Trump’s plan allows Palestinians to have a state in the world that exists.”
Maybe. Maybe not.
The main problem is that it doesn’t address the real issue, which is that…
the Palestinians don’t want a state.
(As Dr. Seuss might say, “No they DO NOT!”)
More specifically, they don’t want a state as long as any final agreement for such a Palestinian state ensures that it must exist side by side with a viable Zionist Entity.
That is, the pretense that they DO want a state is a tactic to “fundamentally change” their “Partner in Peace”(TM) so that it EITHER a) disappears OR b) is too weakened to effectively defend itself (IOW see “a”).
(Besides, the “peace process” also enables Palestinian leaders to rake in an enormous amount of personal income, which they can squirrel away in the usual places.)
“Too weakened”.
“Weakened” can operate on several levels: militarily, morally, or losing the support of minions of “humane”, “concerned” people (especially in the universities and the media)—including its erstwhile allies—around the globe…casting a particular group—or country?—as “pariah” being a tried and tested method for preparing for its destruction; i.e., for making its destruction a moral necessity.
And so…since the Palestinians do NOT want a state—but plan, via “wanting a state” to, in fact, destroy their “Partner in Peace”(TM)—how could any “peace plan” possibly achieve what it intends to achieve?
How indeed!
Ah, but that’s an easy one. The answer? Define “peace” to mean the disappearance of the Zionist Entity. Let time (and glorious hatred) do its work; be very, very patient while keeping up the pressure (and inventing new and more impressive slanders…while repackaging the old ones!) et VOILA!
Any other questions?
Indeed, one may well wonder whether the “Deal of the Century” has been formulated to induce the “Palestinian” leadership to manifest their intransigence, thereby justifying Israel moving ahead with reunification (“annexation”). Under that premise, once the “Palestinian” leadership from Gaza to Ramallah rejects the Trump plan outright, there presumably remains no further obstacle with the Trump White House for Israel to proceed with reunifying the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria, once and for all. And that massive reunification of Judea and Samaria with the Israeli heartland will be a very big deal indeed. The deal of the century.
https://spectator.org/the-deal-of-the-century/
“…manifest…”
Perhaps that was the idea (though I doubt it); but if so, it will NOT convince a world that has up until now refused to be convinced. What after all has changed? Arafat gave up two offers. Abbas, one. Hamas, well….
The sheer “beauty” of the “peace process” is that:
1. The Palestinians don’t have to agree to anything and can do anything and say anything they want to (threats, violence, lies, delegitimization of Israel, rewrite history, etc.).
2. They will never be seriously criticized for their stance. In fact, they will always be defended as the ever-aggrieved party, as the most-suffering-of-all-time people.
3. Israel WILL be criticized as the party that is most gumming up the works—e.g., intransigent, militaristic, pro-war, against peace, a danger to the region, a danger to the world, etc., etc.
Every time. All the time.
(After all, as the experts scornfully insist, how can—and why should—Israel actually be rewarded for agreeing to “give up” what never was legally hers in the first place?)
Which all goes to point out the extraordinary genius of Yassir Arafat….
Declare the simple truth; the Palestinial leadership is opposed to any peace.
Then, annex the West Bank, as legally the 1922 internationally accepted declaration allows.
Given Islam’s theological support for shia taqiyya and sunni muruna, reliable vetting of ‘moderate’ Muslims is impossible. So deport every Muslim living in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel proper. Offer financial compensation for Muslim property owners and moving expenses for all.
Declare that the day that Israel suffers a WMD attack is the day that Mecca ceases to exist.
Art Deco on January 29, 2020 at 9:08 pm said:
This is a nonsense statement.
If international laws and UN resolutions been ignored then that becomes “nonsense” ….isn’t?
Geoffrey Britain on January 30, 2020 at 2:10 pm said:
Well, if someone came to you and apply what you said in your statement did you agree to leave your home, your neighbourhood, your region and your homeland?
Don’t forget the other side who hold similar thinking “Ultra-Orthodox”
Just like their uncle brothers……..
If international laws and UN resolutions been ignored then that becomes “nonsense” ….isn’t?
There is no such thing as international law. There is no authority to define, enforce, and adjudicate such a ‘law’. There is merely international convention. To say that the ruling authority in a territory is acting ‘illegally’ with reference to some standard dreamed up by cookie-pushing public nuisances is a nonsense statement. Israel makes the law on the West Bank. There was no competing authority there until 1993.
Then, annex the West Bank, as legally the 1922 internationally accepted declaration allows.
This is also a nonsense statement.
Who Started the Six Day War of June 1967?
Sure, expel the UN buffer force, set up an impromptu alliance with two other Arab states, put your troops on the border, blockade a major sea lane, and whisper sweet nothings of this variety:
Preparations have already been made. We are now ready to confront Israel. They have claimed many things about the 1956 Suez war, but no one believed them after the secrets of the 1956 collusion were uncovered – that mean collusion in which Israel took part. Now we are ready for the confrontation. We are now ready to deal with the entire Palestine question.
The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran, or the withdrawal of the UNEF, but the rights of the Palestine people. It is the aggression which took place in Palestine in 1948 with the collaboration of Britain and the United States. It is the expulsion of the Arabs from Palestine, the usurpation of their rights, and the plunder of their property. It is the disavowal of all the UN resolutions in favour of the Palestinian people.
Look ma, no belligerency!
Art Deco on January 30, 2020 at 3:53 pm said:
Ok, so why then the voices so loud and every member rush to UN to condemns with Russia invaded part of Ukraine?
What about China and Hongkong Saga?
What about China and South China Sea claim?
Then, your theory all these are “a nonsense “
Art Deco
What your view about Saddam invaded Kuwait?
Why did all stand against him? if we go back in history and land of Arabia what’s the history tells us?
Ottoman manuscript map of Iraq and Vilayet-i Basra containing Kuwait and the northern parts of Nejd
Public relations, FB, can be put on for show, or explication, or merely efforting a gain of favor in one sector or another, all without the force of law in the international sphere. Currying allies, warning off enemies and so on, you know. But again, displays aren’t law, not anything like it.
Art Deco on January 30, 2020 at 3:53 pm said:
There is no such thing as international law. There is no authority to define, enforce, and adjudicate such a ‘law’. There is merely international convention. To say that the ruling authority in a territory is acting ‘illegally’ with reference to some standard dreamed up by cookie-pushing public nuisances is a nonsense statement. Israel makes the law on the West Bank. There was no competing authority there until 1993.
The Ottoman Administration of Iraq 1890-1908
The Resilience of a Frontier: Ottoman and Iraqi Claims to Kuwait, 1871-1990
sdferr
Here each one free for exchanging his views, you like it or not it’s your problem
Please do not play with words
Play with words? What the hell are you talking about? I’m not “playing”. These words have meaning, carry ideas and the relations of ideas. So, go from that.
Art Deco on January 30, 2020 at 3:53 pm said:
Thanks for the chaff. Been an education.
What your view about Saddam invaded Kuwait? Why did all stand against him? if we go back in history and land of Arabia what’s the history tells us?
You do what you do for reasons of state or you do it for abstract justice. Nothing else need concern you.
Ok, so why then the voices so loud and every member rush to UN to condemns with Russia invaded part of Ukraine?
Because talk is cheap.
Possession is 9/10 of the law. International law works that way too in the long run unless force is applied to change the facts on the ground. History is tragic that way.
see “Molon labe”
abstract justice??
Good to know you knew Justices………
Golda Meir. I am Palestinian.
https://youtu.be/L0ZFeDWhlDo
Yael Dayan
Dayan’s Daughter Looks Back in Sadness
I think FB is absolutely right. Israel has to give back all land that it occupies. Of course, to be fair, so does everybody else. Let’s see, the Turks have to give back northern Cyprus, the Chinese have to give back Tibet, India has to give back Goa, the Russians have to give back Chechnya, and eastern Poland. Of course, the Poles have to give back East Prussia, the Italians have to give back South Tyrol, the French have to give Alsace back to the Germans, then the Germans have to give it back to the French (whew, that’s a hard one!), the Spanish have to give back Catalonia, the British have to give back the UK to the Normans, the Normans have to give it back to the Saxons, the Saxons have to give it back to the Britons and the Picts, the Scots have to give Scotland back to the Irish, the U.S. has to give back the Southwest to Mexico, but the Mexicans have to give it back to the Spanish, then the Spanish have to give it back to the Indians,– I guess all of the Americas have to give their land to the Indians. Which Indians, though? The Iroqouis? The Creeks? The Commanche? The Apache? The Mohicans? That’ll be a tough one!
I’m running out of steam here, guys. Somebody is going to have to pitch in and help . . .
What? What’s that you say, FB? Oh, the give back business only applies to Joooooos! Why didn’t you say so in the first place, would have saved me a heap of trouble!
Richard Saunders on January 31, 2020 at 4:21 am said:
I think FB is absolutely right. Israel has to give back all land that it occupies.
Sadly you read me very wrong Richard.
I am not going more to replay what “nonsense” that you listed which in the first place I did not say that and don’t try to put your word in my mouth.
What we have both sides/parties have ruining in a circular from 1948 for generations.
This created new generation have hatred / to kill not friendly towards other side, this must be broken and make people understand to live on the land they share.
As I said none of the regimes in the past like that and they use their people to fights war that brought nothing just more distraction, of course using occupation/ Zionist / Jews and Jerusalem city to convinced their people to build hatred and going for war.
This makes those regimes feel safe and put the attentions of their nation outside the box. Inside that box it humiliation, abusing human rights, prisoners and killing with different excuses for Nation security.
Those regimes they had more resources and revenues that a country small like Israel and under continuance war threat that state build itself to stand against many nation threat here those nations lost their direction under regimes that mislead their nations of “Palestine” and let those nations undeveloped and poor under educated and behind most the world countries and nations.
Today we have few regimes still going this hole
MEIR SPEECH
The General’s Son
What we have both sides/parties have ruining in a circular from 1948 for generations.
Actually, no. That sentence right there is an indicator that you haven’t understood the most salient aspect of this dispute, and that you cannot learn.