Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

The editorial in Haaretz cuts through to the heart of the matter when it says that Netanyahu's rejection of a settlement based on the "pre-1967 borders":

Netanyahu is lying to the Israeli public and leading the U.S. administration astray when he portrays Israel's current borders as defensible. The occupation of the West Bank, the planting of more settlements on the rocky hilltops, control of the Jordan Valley or the construction of thousands of homes in East Jerusalem do not remove the Iranian threat, prevent the firing of Qassam rockets or end Hezbollah's willingness to fire missiles at Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/op ... s-1.363224

Cheers,
Shafique

A better name would be the 1949 armictice lines IMO. Although I guess everybody knows what is meant by "1967 border", using 1949 armictice lines would be more clear, as the lines came into place in 1949 and the lines came into being after a cease-fire, not a peace treaty, so calling the 1949 armictice lines borders would be inapt. The lines for the larger part of 1967 included Golan, Gaza and the WB under Israeli control. If you want to use 1967, at least specify 1967 pre-June. Going back to 1967 before June would also mean that Gaza is under control of Egypt and the WB under control of Jordan. I donot think this is what people saying that they want to back to "1967 borders" actually mean.
The whole thing is also quite unique in history, where the aggresive loosers make suck strong demands against the victor.
The main issue is not borders, or even Jerusalem, although I understand Israels worries of their airport coming into range of guided ground to ground misseles. This year one from Gaza was fired at an Israeli school bus.
The main issue is the 4th (or 5th?) generation refugees. Israel will only accept a minimum of them returning, while all Pali parties cannot go away from the demand for full return. Remember its Fatah and Hamas that keeps the refugees in camps under force with false promises that one time they can return.

Pedantic, FD is not

FD don't take it seriously both obama and netanyahu are baiting the int. community with no sense and shame..Ask them how their gonna join gaza and western bank securely to get back to 67 borders...they'd then be absolutely shuttered!..I call these type of people real charlatans..they have nothing to say but buy peoples hope...that's all, if you can't do anything you can always buy time...

Obama will be doing the dance in front of AIPAC and such before the 2012 reelection campaign.

Berrin - the 1967 borders don't have a link between Gaza and the West Bank. It does represent 22% of Palestine, with 78% going to Israel - when the original UN partition gave Israel 55% and allocated 45% to Palestine.

What the Haaretz editorial states quite clearly is that the excuses for Israel wanting to annex (i.e. steal) land occupied in 1967 are convincing fewer and fewer people.

It is actually in Israel's benefit to have a viable Palestinian state - it will resolve a major injustice and rallying point for opposition to Israel. As others at Haaretz point out, to stick to the desire to hold on to the occupied land risks turning Israel into a greater pariah state than it is right now.

Cheers,
Shafique

Berrin wrote: if you can't do anything you can always buy time...

I would call it wasting time. Everybody knows more or less how the borders will look like. Based on the 1949 armictice lines with some land swaps. This has been the consensus since Oslo, more or less, at least from the US and Israeli side. The real issue is the "refugees". I havenot heard everything Obama said, but I donot believe he addressed this issue. Talks are futule, unless this issue gets solved first. Until then, talks are a waste of time. In the mean time Israel is building more facts on the ground and is loosing slowly international sympathy, while prospering at the same time.

-- Sun May 22, 2011 6:04 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:Obama will be doing the dance in front of AIPAC and such before the 2012 reelection campaign.

I think Obama is counting on being re-elected without the jewish vote.

Going to the other side and derailing the topic for a moment, but wasn't it the Arabs who said NO we do accept this partion and went to war !

I think the ordinary Palestenian citizen got a very raw deal because of the neigbouring Arab politicians and their ego's and ambitions.

Imagine if they would have just shut up and accepted it like India and Pakistan accepted a partition in 1947. Ok they have been at it with each other since and even gone to war several times but still the situation is much much better than Israel and Palestine.

Anyways thats the past, question is what to do now ?

Berrin - the 1967 borders don't have a link between Gaza and the West Bank. It does represent 22% of Palestine, with 78% going to Israel - when the original UN partition gave Israel 55% and allocated 45% to Palestine.

I know shafique, I rechecked the borders 47 and 67.. In the year 67 there are 3 mases of lands occupied by israel and the same by plestinians..It's like a maze.. in 67 it is reduced to 1 mass of land for israel 2 masses for palestine...now what I am wondering is How they're gonna join gaza and west bank to make comfortable and secure living for palestinians..Israel surely woudn't accept to be split into two halfs to let palestinians join together?

IMO,landwise, Stupidity is all over the place, in this instance I don't really care who gets what proportion of land as they will never gonna agree upon how they gonna cut accross eachother in this issue...

Flying Dutchman wrote:I would call it wasting time. Everybody knows more or less how the borders will look like. Based on the 1949 armictice lines with some land swaps. This has been the consensus since Oslo, more or less, at least from the US and Israeli side. The real issue is the "refugees". I havenot heard everything Obama said, but I donot believe he addressed this issue. Talks are futule, unless this issue gets solved first. Until then, talks are a waste of time. In the mean time Israel is building more facts on the ground and is loosing slowly international sympathy, while prospering at the same time.

After a very long time I don't think there is anything that I totally disagree with here.

Regarding the refugees I think the Palestenians will have to waive the right to return clause here if anything is to be achieved.

Jurusalem should me handed over to the international community governed by Christain, Jews and Muslims make it a multifaith sort of vatican if you will, with no aligence to any paticular country so that would take out both Israel and Palestine bickering over it.

What I donot understand is why "refugees" from Gaza held in a camp in Jordan are not allowed to return:

http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=175

The employment guidance programmme is one of several initiatives sponsored by a EUR 2.5 million grant from the European Commission to help residents of Jerash Camp in Jordan.
Furthermore, there are a number of restrictions on their employment opportunities within Jordan They are excluded from various employment sectors including government service, law, agriculture, engineering, journalism, certified accounting and health care. Additionally, they cannot become members of cooperative associations or set up a private business outside the camp boundaries without a permit. Ex-Gaza refugees are also barred from training and employment programmes run by the government.

The generous contribution from the European Commission has made a substantial difference to the lives of ex-Gaza refugees in Jerash Camp.

Another observation: Pali "refugees" are maintained by Western money, and virtually no Arab money (as was mentioned in another thread showing a list of donors to the UNRWA)

It appears that Arabs are only interested in the right of return when its inside the 1949 armictice lines.

^Well, we seem to have reached a point of consensus. The solution is going to be based on the '1967 borders' with some land swaps, and a full right of return of refugees is not going to happen - I believe that a symbolic limited number and compensation for the rest is the solution that everyone is heading towards.

Jerusalem will be split, I can't see it going to an international community - both sides want it as their capital.

I also agree that the Arab community should do more to support the Palestinians and that they shouldn't be used as a political pawns.

However, injustice by Arabs towards Palestinians don't excuse injustices towards Palestinians by those who militarily continue to occupy their land. (Apologies for stating the obvious).

Cheers,
Shafique

and a full right of return of refugees is not going to happen

According to the zionist jewish mentality,this should really be happening without a doubt, since 60 years of exile is nothing compared to thousands of years of it...

Now we'll listen to what Dr. Salman Abu Sitta says..
http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/art ... nsgression

and then appreciate the words coming from Rogger Higginson

The only way forward now for these two peoples, so inextricably entwined, is to challenge the root cause of more than 60 years of war and suffering ‑ the ethnically exclusive ideology of Zionism. The real road to peace and justice lies in the creation of a single state in historical Palestine where religion is a matter for the individual, and everyone has the same rights under a single legal system. Ironically it is this, rather than the Zionist illusion of a ‘Jewish state’, which really will give the Jewish people the peace and security they crave.

http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/art ... estruction

I'm for the two state solution myself.

Ideally, either a full democracy or one that is like in Lebanon - where each religious group is given a guaranteed representation is probably the most 'just' or 'logical' solution. But facts on the ground means that it is now unimaginable for there not to be an Israel that considers itself a 'Jewish' state.

The 2000 Arab peace plan recognised this fact, and that is the basis of the diplomatic moves that the Palestinians are forging ahead with.

The same goes for right of return - there's ideal justice, and there is realpolitik.

Cheers,
Shafique