Palestine/Israel - The Issues

 The Issues:

- The border.  Will it be 1967, If not that, what?

- Jerusalem. A shared city?

- Return of the Palestinian diaspora to a Palestinian state

- De-militarization of the Palestinian state.

- The wall.  Is it permanent?

- Will the Palestinians control their own borders?

- Gaza

Anything else?

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/09/15/middle-east-peace-talks-abbas-netanyahu-clinton.html

Comments

[J]

Colonel,

Bibi and company have NO intention of:
- returning to 67 borders, instead they seek a 'greater Israel' and total Israeli hegemony of the entire Mideast.
- sharing Jerusalem. Jerusalem will be the 'undivided/eternal' 'Jewish' Capital of greater Israel.
- Palestinians diaspora return will never be allowed to happen, to do so would demographically destroy Jewish greater Israel.
- today's Israel is an apartheid Israel whose ugliness is darker than South Africa's ever thought of, as Israel's apartheid/fence is apartheid in the physical/mental/spiritual realms.
- Palestinians will not control their own borders, they are merely window dressing and those Palestinians used for show are nothing more than Israel's puppets on their strings.
- Gaza, say what? Gaza, just like Palestine, as well as Palestinians have no place in Bib and company's plans of 'Greater Israel'.

[Norbert N, Salamon]

Unfortunately J is abolutely correct. There is no hope of TWO STATE SOLUTION, with or without AIPAC.

[mo]

Colonel,
The obvious and well known answers to these questions is what puts the Israelis and Palestinians at such different poles of the negotiation spectrum that the most the Israelis will give is such a long way short of what the Palestinians can accept.

Such a long way that even the supine leadership of Fatah cannot sign it, no matter how far they can bend. Lets not forget that currently Abbas represents exactly no one. His mandate as Prez ended a while back and the other elected leaders of the Palestinians have no say in these negotiations.

67 borders? If the Israelis had any intention to returning to anything like 67 they would have accepted the Saudi Plan a long time ago. In fact you could propbably bundle the answer to this question and the answer to the Wall question as one.

Jerusalem? What Israeli leader is going to be brave enough (or suicidal enough) to give an inch of it back? certainly not the uber-politician Bibi. It would have taken one of the former military men to have the guts to do that, a Rabin or even a Sharon.

As for the Palestinian state, one that is demilitarized and not in control of its own borders is hardly a state. Its becomes merely a semi-autonomous region of Israel.

2 big anything elses missing from this list are water and Hamas.

Can an Israel, already suffering from huge water problems, with the Sea of Galillee already beyond its critical low-point in terms of water levels, give up any amount of water that it gets from the West Bank and can any nascent Palestinian state thrive without a far more equitable share of (its own!!) water resources.

As for Gaza, I would assume the conversation between Bibi and Abbas would be along the lines "you can have it", "no please you keep it".... But any agreement that Hamas is signed up to or convinced to sign up to after the fact is worth less than the paper it is signed on.

[Sidney O. Smith III]

It all starts with who will ultimately control the Temple Mount. Odds are extremely high that the GOI will not give up the goal of exclusive possession of the very land upon which the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque are located. The Temple Mount serves no strategic military value so any Israeli reluctance to guarantee it does not want the land of al_Haram ash Sharif clearly shows that post 67 Zionism is no longer secular, if it ever was at all.

In my opinion, the USG should first force the issue of control of the Temple Mount. It, in turn, will force the GOI to put their cards on the table and reveal intent. Under what conditions will the Israelis relinquish, permanently, any intention of controlling the Temple Mount? The answer will tell you everything you need to know about post modern Zionism and how to approach “’peace” negotiations. In fact, the answer may very well tell you why a 2 state solution is a chimera.

Plenty of evidence suggests that the goal of Zionism is control of the land of al Haram ash Zharif. As but one example. Drudge, recently, has tried to conflate the idea of “No Mosque at Ground Zero” with “No Mosque at the Temple Mount” How? It was with an advertisement of an image of the Dome of the Rock and superimposed on the image were the words “No Mosque at Ground Zero” or similar. That too tells you all you need to know.

[Patrick Lang]

All

I suppose that the point I was making is that the odds against a deal are enormous. Such a thing would actually require good will. pl

[Patrick Lang]

Norbert S Salomon

I couldn't agree more. If there was a chance there would have been a truce by now. pl

[Trent]

- Water rights

[Patrick Lang]

trent

desal on the Med and the Red-Dead Canal Project? pl

[Fred]

Don't forget electric power supplies and the off-shore oil/gas rights.

[Norbert N, Salamon]

Presently the Israeli desanization is the cheapest [as of late 2009] New technologies are in small caqse investigation according to The Scientist [UK]

[Grimgrin]

- "How can we trust you to stick to the deal?" Seems to me to be the fundamental issue.

PL: Call it the Middle East Water And Power Alliance maybe?

[Cloned Poster]

When in Tanazania in 1997 I bought a Jeep from a USAid worker employed to build an airstrip in Gaza for an airport.

I can see the 737's landing there

[Trent]

PL, I should have been more explicit. I meant water sharing, especially up north in the Kinneret.

The Dead-Red Canal (sic. intended) project is an environmental disaster in waiting.

How is the Med desal. project going?

[Phil Giraldi]

J, Sidney Smith and others commenting above have outlined why an agreement cannot happen. I believe that the only reason the essentially fake negotiations are taking place at all is to do Obama a favor prior to the November elections here in the US. Both Bibi and Abbas likely want to stay on the good side of the US President. My bet is that some form of yak-yak will continue until then and will subsequently peter out.

[Fred]

Grimgrin,

There seems to be something similar already for electric power:
http://www.medemip.eu/WebPages/Common/Default.aspx

However if you read some of the news stories the Israeli government, or perhaps their incumbent utilities (not sure of the ownership), are opposed to expansion/competition. Not surprising given they are natural monopolies. But the nationalism adds to the risk factor and the desire to be self sufficient. Remember what happened with Ukraine's gas supply? Who wants to rely on Israel's word, written contracts notwithstanding?

[CK]

But is it good for ____ ( fill in the blank with your preferred loyalty from the following options: Me, The current Government of the USA, The current owners of the current government of the USA, Goldman Sachs )

[Patrick Lang]

Phil

The favor being done is to Obama's liberal Zionist financial backers. pl

[Russ Wagenfeld]

Hi Pat
I too see water rights and access to water as crucial.
Russ

[Stanley Henning]

If we don't step back and start seriously coordinating OUR strategic interests taking into account the very real interplay between both civil and military factors then we may be destined for the dustbin of empires past faster than we can imagine.

[Roy G]

Speaking of water access, how about that deep water port that the Israelis promised years ago to build in Gaza?

[Lewie]

Patrick Lang writes,above;
"The favor being done is to Obama's liberal zionist financial backers."
You could include others such as Obama's liberal anti-zionist financial backers, because they benefit from the charade too.

[R Whitman]

We should speculate on what happens when these talks are declared a failure.

Will the Palestinians abandon the idea of a 2 state solution in favor of a secular demographic solution. It seems to me, with the right leadership, they could insist on Israeli citizenship and dominate the Knesset. I do not see the US standing in the way for very long on the principle of "one person one vote".

[Ken Roberts]

Just noticed Charles Freeman's remarks of Sept 1st, reported on Helena Cobban's website justworldnews.org -- they are relevant to this topic.

Also, he has a book coming out Oct 1st that looks good reading.

[The beaver]

Colonel

Did you see this segment on NBC last night:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/39201966#39201966

Zionist lobby restricting Obama

[J]

Phil,

Read your latest

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/09/15/a-bipartisan-look-at-the-israel-lobby/

All the 'think tanks' that are covers for the Israeli govt. need to be booted out of our U.S. and those who work and write for them registered under FARA. Of course I know that will never happen as the Israeli government won't allow it to happen, any 'threat' will see the Israeli government mustering their 'tentacles' into action.