A Palestinian peace plan Israelis can live with

[Oliver]

A view days ago, Haaretz published a quite interesting proposal for a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian territories. Now the correspondent who wrote the piece might be a controversial figure to some people and the plan is a little bit too detailed IMHO, but after examining the proposal itself, what is your reaction to it? Is it worth to seriously think about it, and what are the plans weak points in your opinion?

Quote:

Bradley Burston:
A Palestinian peace plan Israelis can live with

1. I support two-states, one Israel and one Palestine. As far as I am concerned, I can recognize Israel's "Jewish" character and Israelis should recognize Palestine's "non-Jewish" character.

2. I oppose violence of any kind from and by anyone. I reject Hamas' participation in any Palestinian government without first agreeing to surrender all arms and to accept two-states as a "final" peace agreement. But I also reject allowing Israeli settlers to carry any weapons and believe Israelis must impose the same restrictions on them.

3. I can support some settlements remaining - given the reality of 42 years of time passing - in a dunam-for-dunam land exchange. If Ariel is 500 dunams with a lifeline from Israel, then Israel gives Palestine 500 dunams in exchange.

4. Jerusalem should be a shared city and Palestinians should have an official presence in East Jerusalem. The Old City should be shared by both permitting open access to the city to all with a joint Palestinian-Israeli police presence.

5. Palestinian refugees would give up their demand to return to pre-1948 homes and lands lost during the conflict with Israel. Instead, some could apply for family reunification through Israel and the remainder would be compensated through a fund created and maintained by the United States, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the United Nations.

6. I also think Israelis should find it in their hearts to show compassion and offer their apologies to Palestinians for the conflict.

7. I support creation of a similar fund to compensate those Jews from Arab lands who lost their homes and lands, too, when they fled.

8. I think the Wall should be torn down, or relocated to the new borders. I have no problem separating the two nations for a short duration to help rebuild confidence between our two people.

9. All political parties, Palestinian and Israelis, should eliminate languages denying each other's ... *snip*

Full source: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1130354.html

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by Oliver

A view days ago, Haaretz published a quite interesting proposal for a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian territories. Now the correspondent who wrote the piece might be a controversial figure to some people and the plan is a little bit too detailed IMHO, but after examining the proposal itself, what is your reaction to it? Is it worth to seriously think about it, and what are the plans weak points in your opinion?

well from a breif reading i would say the two things i see as the most likely to cause it to be a non starter would be the requirement for Hamas to be disarmed before participating in government and settlers to be disarmed....Also the "jerusalem should be a shared city" which I think would be a serious non starter for Israel.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by The Fool

well from a breif reading i would say the two things i see as the most likely to cause it to be a non starter would be the requirement for Hamas to be disarmed before participating in government and settlers to be disarmed....Also the "jerusalem should be a shared city" which I think would be a serious non starter for Israel.

Mhmm, the disarmament surely might be a tricky issue in light of Israels overwhelmingly potent arsenal, but I have no idea how a 2-state solution could work without the shared city of Jerusalem given it's religious relevance to both sides.

[Thunder]

"what?? some Jews should not be allowed to live in the West Bank?

thats racism!!! racism I tell ya!! its the Nazis all over again!!! why should even one-square inch of the West Bank be Judenrein????"

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

"what?? some Jews should not be allowed to live in the West Bank?

thats racism!!! racism I tell ya!! its the Nazis all over again!!! why should even one-square inch of the West Bank be Judenrein????"

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by Oliver

i was paraphasing the beliefs of typical right-wing Jewish/Israelis.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

i was paraphasing the beliefs of typical right-wing Jewish/Israelis.

Oh, I understand. But what do you think about the pretty balanced proposal yourself?

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Oh, I understand. But what do you think about the pretty balanced proposal yourself?

i have no problem with Israel keeping 5% of the West Bank, in exchange for 5% of israel going to the Palestinians. Israel should keep the Jewish areas of East Jerusalem and the Palestinians get the Arab areas. a special regime should rule the walled city. israel should allow back 100,000 refugees and an international compensation fund set up for the rest.

this is the basic Geneva Accords.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

i have no problem with Israel keeping 5% of the West Bank, in exchange for 5% of israel going to the Palestinians. Israel should keep the Jewish areas of East Jerusalem and the Palestinians get the Arab areas. a special regime should rule the walled city. israel should allow back 100,000 refugees and an international compensation fund set up for the rest.

this is the basic Geneva Accords.

What would a "special regime in Jerusalem" look like? I personally wouldn't mind if Jerusalem would be the Capital for both countries/Governments.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by Oliver

What would a "special regime in Jerusalem" look like? I personally wouldn't mind if Jerusalem would be the Capital for both countries/Governments.

#1. i am not aware of any buildings or offices in the Old City being used as part of the capital governmental structure of Israel.

#2. as first proposed in 1947, the Old City could become a special regime, with a council with members of all three religions making decisions. there could be a rotating leadership of the council every 4 years, with each religion having a turn.

the Old City is a very special place, and deserves to be put above politics.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Oliver

A view days ago, Haaretz published a quite interesting proposal for a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinian territories. Now the correspondent who wrote the piece might be a controversial figure to some people and the plan is a little bit too detailed IMHO, but after examining the proposal itself, what is your reaction to it? Is it worth to seriously think about it, and what are the plans weak points in your opinion?

Interesting proposal, how many Palestinians do you think can live with it?

[McHrozni]

Points 2, 5, 7, 8, 11 are certainly impossible without major shifts, others likely as well.

Yay for the plan.

McHrozni

[Doctor Evil]

Somehow it seems to me that the term 'Palestinian peace deal' should be reserved to offers made by someone representing the Palestinian Palestinian people in some capacity.

Beside this crucial point, the outline of the deal is quite appealing. There are a couple of points I did not like, but this is minor stuff.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Interesting proposal, how many Palestinians do you think can live with it?

I'm having a bit of trouble locating similar articles in the Palestinian media...

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by Doctor Evil

Somehow it seems to me that the term 'Palestinian peace deal' should be reserved to offers made by someone representing the Palestinian Palestinian people in some capacity.

You know something? Perhaps the opposite. Perhaps any real peace deal will only come from Palestinians NOT connected to the government which gain major support.

I said it before and I say it now: the #1 obstacle for peace is not the Palestinian people as such. It is the Palestinian leadership and its goal of the "staged plan" for Israel's destruction.

[NWO Sentryman]

Originally Posted by Skeptic

You know something? Perhaps the opposite. Perhaps any real peace deal will only come from Palestinians NOT connected to the government which gain major support.

I said it before and I say it now: the #1 obstacle for peace is not the Palestinian people as such. It is the Palestinian leadership and its goal of the "staged plan" for Israel's destruction.

No it's israel's suppression of the palestinian people (let me quote a scholar on this, and someone who has actually been to the middle east and knows of thie situation and uses facts)

To sum it up

Quote:

Quote:
MYTH: Israel discriminates against its Arab citizens.
A "myth" that, as we shall see, has been perpetuated by such disreputable institutions as Amnesty International, Minorities At Risk, Freedom House, and so on...

I suppose it depends upon what you mean by "open society". Judging by the definition, Israel is not an open society by any standard. In fact, I'd be interested in knowing precisely which definition of "open society" Bard is using here, or if this is just intended to be empty rhetoric.

Israeli authorities have lately enforcement of censorship regulations and monitored Arabic newspapers based in East Jerusalem, sometimes ordering newspapers to halt publication of stories about the intifada until the story first appeared in the Israeli media, or even closing newspapers down as in the case of the Arab publication Sawt al-Haqq Wal-Hurriya. As far as Freedom of the Press is concerned, Israel is only "partially free" (in Israel proper), tied with Benin according to Freedom House's annual rankings, and "not free" in the Occupied Territories, with less press freedom than even China or the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Israeli Arabs certainly do not have free movement even within their own country (think security wall, checkpoints, etc), and suffer severe legal ramifications if they visit neighboring countries. Furthermore, contrary to what Avalon is claiming, if you are an Israeli and your spouse is Palestinian, the law prohibits your spouse from residing in Israel.


I've mentioned before that the State of Israel makes a legal distinction between the Druze and other Israeli Arabs, so it is disingenuous to point to Druze as examples of Israeli Arab integration.

No one is expecting Israel to solve all of its social problems in 60 years. However, it and its defenders should cease using misleading rhetoric. If they claim to be "an open society" and "free from discrimination", the burden of proof is upon them to prove it - and begging that discrimination has yet to be eradicated from the US is not a legitimate excuse.

This entire link that Avalon has provided is nothing more than a pack of irrelevant statistics (such as the population statistics, which I've excised), misleading statements, and some out and out lies, such as the claim that Israel is one of the only places in the Middle East where women can vote. I think we can safely disregard it.

[Skeptic]

Quote:

No it's israel's suppression of the palestinian people (let me quote a scholar on this, and someone who has actually been to the middle east and knows of thie situation and uses facts)

Hon, I live in the middle east. I am an Israeli. I know the facts. The Arab and Palestinian rejection of Israel's very existence -- both in the PLO and the Hamas charter, for example -- is from long before the 1967 war, or for that matter, the founding of the PLO in 1964. Only a few months ago, the "moderate" PLO general assembly re-affirmed its commitment to "fight zionism until it is eradicated".

[NWO Sentryman]

Originally Posted by Skeptic

Hon, I live in the middle east. I am an Israeli. I know the facts. The Arab and Palestinian rejection of Israel's very existence -- both in the PLO and the Hamas charter, for example -- is from long before the 1967 war, or for that matter, the founding of the PLO in 1964. Only a few months ago, the "moderate" PLO general assembly re-affirmed its commitment to "fight zionism until it is eradicated".

well this scholar seems to know the facts (I cited the JVL and he tore it to pieces, my screenname on that debate Was Avalon1).

He sais he was a lecturer in Jerusalem for a while, and he noted the discrimination palestinians/Arabs/non-Ashkenazis suffered

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

He sais he was a lecturer in Jerusalem for a while, and he noted the discrimination palestinians/Arabs/non-Ashkenazis suffered

what does the ethnic sub-group of Jews have to do with any of this?

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by Skeptic

Hon, I live in the middle east. I am an Israeli. I know the Facts

the following sentence has been incorporated into the Oxford english dictionary as the new official definition for appeal to authority falacy.


Its my general observation from your posts that you are only interested in facts if they reinforce your preconceptions....

I live in SE Asia, I am Australian. I know the facts.

[Puppycow]

The main points seem rather reasonable. The extremists on both sides won't agree.

[the_eye]

The Palestinians won't give up the possibility to the Right of Return, considering the Israelis aren't.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by the_eye

The Palestinians won't give up the possibility to the Right of Return, considering the Israelis aren't.

most Palestinians are quite aware that Israel can't be expected to have 5 million Palestinians move in. and most Palestinians are quite aware that most Palestinians have no interest in moving to Israel and becoming loyal citizens.

Israel should accept shared responsibility for the refugee crisis, and in the name of brotherhood and decency and peace, offer to re-settle 100,000 Palestinian refugees.

[Skeptic]

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

well this scholar seems to know the facts (I cited the JVL and he tore it to pieces, my screenname on that debate Was Avalon1).

He sais he was a lecturer in Jerusalem for a while, and he noted the discrimination palestinians/Arabs/non-Ashkenazis suffered

This is his great discovery? This is what makes him an "expert"?

I could've told you that myself. Every Israeli could have told you that. OF COURSE there is discrimination in Israel. OF COURSE there is discrimination in the USA, too. Ask any Israeli and he'll tell you the ashkenazis are the upper class, much like WASPs in the USA, and there is social discrimination against others. Ask any American and he'll say the same about WASPs.

So what?

That is not the reason for the wars to eradicate Israel, much like Bin Laden isn't really interested in destroying the USA because of any discrimination Muslim-Americans might face in getting promotion. If tomorrow Mugabe declares that the USA must be wiped off the face of the earth, would you seriously think it's because of its unfair treatment of Blacks? Is Chavez pals with Ahmadejinad because he is outraged of the way Latinos are denied partnership in USA law firms?

Discrimination is a reason for protest, for criticism, for demand for change. Indeed, both the USA and Israel had changed very much in the last few decades -- mostly for the good -- in their treatment of Blacks or Arabs. Part of that was due to to external criticism, part due to internal criticism.

It is no excuse, and not the reason, for genocidal wars whose purpose is itself racist -- namely, the eradication of all Jews.

[Doctor Evil]

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

No it's israel's suppression of the palestinian people (let me quote a scholar on this, and someone who has actually been to the middle east and knows of thie situation and uses facts)

To sum it up

Your source is not that good. For instance, he seems to conflate Israeli Arabs and Palestinians in the occupied territories:

Quote:

Israeli Arabs certainly do not have free movement even within their own country (think security wall, checkpoints, etc).

I also have my suspicions on the claim about visiting other countries.

But the reason that I decided to respond has to do with this:

Quote:

As far as Freedom of the Press is concerned, Israel is only "partially free" (in Israel proper), tied with Benin according to Freedom House's annual rankings, and "not free" in the Occupied Territories, with less press freedom than even China or the Islamic Republic of Iran.

I would suspect that papers in the territories are produced in the major cities, and none of these are under Israeli control. So I am not sure how this part is graded.

As for the grade inside Israel, one Israeli journalist, Adi Schwartz was surprised by the grade, and went investigating:

Quote:

The report’s author, Adam Werner, is not a journalist and this is his first year with Freedom House. I asked him how he knew that there was self-censorship. It was based, he told me, on an interview with Yizhar Beer, the director of Keshev, a watchdog group.

Because of Beer’s well known, far-left political views, I asked Werner if he consulted anyone else. Communications law experts? Journalists? “No,” he said. The assertion of heightened self-censorship (which actually led to Israel’s status decline) was based solely on Mr Beer’s view.

I then asked about the High Court’s decisions. Mr Werner asked me to send him the rulings (rather late, I’d say). I also asked about “pro-peace radio station” RAM-FM, which, according to the report, was “closed down” by the Israeli police. But the station closed because it didn’t have a permit. After a permit was obtained, it went back on air. Six months later it closed — due to financial problems.

The report turn to be a farce, based on very little fact checking. Claims made by people with strong political views are taken at face value when they turn to be inaccurate. The material you cited seems to be in the same vein.

[Skeptic]

It's not surprising a one-time lecturer in an Israeli university -- those places might as well be PLO headquarters, if judgment purely by the political views expressed by the faculty were the only criterion -- thinks this way.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

#1. i am not aware of any buildings or offices in the Old City being used as part of the capital governmental structure of Israel.

#2. as first proposed in 1947, the Old City could become a special regime, with a council with members of all three religions making decisions. there could be a rotating leadership of the council every 4 years, with each religion having a turn.

the Old City is a very special place, and deserves to be put above politics.

Well, the wisest thing to do would be to turn Jerusalem into a sort of multi-religious Vatican and use other cities for the two countries Capitals. But would you claim that it wouldn't be possible to turn the City into a Capital for two countries nonetheless?

[Thunder]

yes, that is an option. turn the Old City into its own city-state, ruled by a council made up of the three faiths, with rotating leadership.

western jerusalem will be the capital of Israel, and eastern Jerusalem will be the capital of Palestine.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Interesting proposal, how many Palestinians do you think can live with it?

Quite a view - if you take all Palestinian views into account. But how many religious "God is *********** promising us the whole of Eretz Israel" believers could live with the proposal? ... You're right: Not a single one of them.

[Grizzly Bear]

The suggestions are interesting but unrealistic. You have a political party established in Palestine based on:

From the Hamas Charter:

Quote:

Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised.

…

The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).

source

Even if you could get Israeli politics in agreement with this kind of plan, unless Hama's ideals change, then any solution expecting them to make concessions is a utopian dream.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

yes, that is an option. turn the Old City into its own city-state, ruled by a council made up of the three faiths, with rotating leadership.

western jerusalem will be the capital of Israel, and eastern Jerusalem will be the capital of Palestine.

Like America is capable of differing between Religion and Democracy in many instances, the Israeli and Palestinian Countries could differ between their Government and a Religious entity ruling the "holy" sites in a democratic manner.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by Oliver

Quite a view - if you take all Palestinian views into account. But how many religious "God is *********** promising us the whole of Eretz Israel" believers could live with the proposal? ... You're right: Not a single one of them.

it is a common belief that any peace plan that involves forcing mass numbers of Israeli settlers to return to Israel, could lead to an Israeli civil war.

this is another reason by the bi-national nation-state option may be the only viable one.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

it is a common belief that any peace plan that involves forcing mass numbers of Israeli settlers to return to Israel, could lead to an Israeli civil war.

this is another reason by the bi-national nation-state option may be the only viable one.

That's interesting. While my personal suspicion is that Israel is capable to turn itself into a civil war about the *********** "illegal/God-says-its-legal" settlements, I didn`t read or hear about that ugly possibility in any Worldwide Media, except non-US Media and PBS Frontline.

So while the two-state solution seems to be the only reasonably one anyway, is there another solution that doesn't complicate the matter any more than the two-state solution that allows Muslims and Jews to determinate their own future pretty much independently?

[Thunder]

Yes. its called one bi-national nation-state, for Jews and Arabs.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by parky76

Yes. its called one bi-national nation-state, for Jews and Arabs.

Well, but a bi-national state will not work due to the strong opposing beliefs on both sides concerning religion. So a bi-national state cannot work unless it would be based on non-religious values and tolerance.

[Newtons Bit]

This plan will create anything but peace.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by parky76

Yes. its called one bi-national nation-state, for Jews and Arabs.

The Palestinians are having a bit of trouble maintaining a state consisting only of Arabs. You think they'd fare better by throwing Israelis into the mix?

When are the next elections in Gaza btw?

[Thunder]

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1131124.html

Hell, the Israelis can't even get themselves to honor a temporary settlement "freeze".

28 new building permits issued.

such things do not instill confidence in Israel's committment to peace.

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by parky76

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1131124.html

Hell, the Israelis can't even get themselves to honor a temporary settlement "freeze".

28 new building permits issued.

such things do not instill confidence in Israel's committment to peace.

Would it matter if Israel temporarily halted settlement construction? That's only one in a long list of preconditions the PA has set to restart negotiations.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by mortimer

Would it matter if Israel temporarily halted settlement construction? That's only one in a long list of preconditions the PA has set to restart negotiations.

That's the most plausible move to even think about peace negotiations. Not as if Israel did care about that in the past thanks to the religious nuts and their influence concerning the Knesset's domestic policies.