One point I haven't seen brought up was that right before the current intifada, during a peace summit in July 2000 at Camp David, Israel agreed to withdraw from 97% of the West Bank, 100% of the Gaza Strip, dismantle most of the settlements, and create a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. The only concessions Arafat had to make were to acknowledge Israeli sovereignty over the parts of the Western Wall religiously significant to Jews (that is, not the entire Temple Mount), and to agree to three early warning stations in the Jordan Valley, which Israel would withdraw from after six years.
The Palestinian negotiators wanted to accept the deal, but Arafat rejected it. According to the principal U.S. peace negotiator, Dennis Ross, the critical issue was the clause in the agreement that said the conflict would now be over. Arafat, whose life has been governed by that conflict, Ross said, simply could not end it.
Fast foward to today, where Israel has done part of what they wanted to do 6 years ago (withrawing from Gaza, and in process, forcibly removing their own people from Gaza), and what do they get? Rockets launched from Gaza into Israel. There is no inducement by the Arab world on the Palestinians to weed out militants who seek the destruction of Israel, hence those who do want to live in peace, side by side with Israel, have no voice. Those are some real disenfranchised voters... Speaking of which, since the Saudis, and UAE, and other Arab countries that are very rich, why don't they pour money into palestine so their fellow Arab brothers won't have to live in poverty? If they can build all those hotels and islands in the UAE, surely they can build some nice apartments and houses in Palestine. Could it be that they want to continue to allow the Palestinians to channel their current plight into hate for Jews and Israel? Food for thought indeed....
In the end, the current cycle of violence lay squarely on Arafat. If there is peace now between Palestine and Israel, there would be more momentum by the Lebanese to clean house. Which brings up the fact that the UN passed a resolution, 1559, a while back that was supposed to get the Lebanese gov't to deploy its troops and drive hezbollah out. If they had done that as well, then hezbollah wouldn't have done what they've done, and Israel wouldn't need to do what the Lebanese gov't has so far refused to do. All they're saying right now is "lets have a cease fire". They need to tack on "and we'll take care of hezbollah". If they come out and say that, and follows through, Israel will lower their "level" quite quickly.
The Palestinian negotiators wanted to accept the deal, but Arafat rejected it. According to the principal U.S. peace negotiator, Dennis Ross, the critical issue was the clause in the agreement that said the conflict would now be over. Arafat, whose life has been governed by that conflict, Ross said, simply could not end it.
Fast foward to today, where Israel has done part of what they wanted to do 6 years ago (withrawing from Gaza, and in process, forcibly removing their own people from Gaza), and what do they get? Rockets launched from Gaza into Israel. There is no inducement by the Arab world on the Palestinians to weed out militants who seek the destruction of Israel, hence those who do want to live in peace, side by side with Israel, have no voice. Those are some real disenfranchised voters... Speaking of which, since the Saudis, and UAE, and other Arab countries that are very rich, why don't they pour money into palestine so their fellow Arab brothers won't have to live in poverty? If they can build all those hotels and islands in the UAE, surely they can build some nice apartments and houses in Palestine. Could it be that they want to continue to allow the Palestinians to channel their current plight into hate for Jews and Israel? Food for thought indeed....
In the end, the current cycle of violence lay squarely on Arafat
Comment