Egypt Denies Offering Land for ‘Sinai State of Palestine’

Notwithstanding the denial, there are many reasons to believe the offer is for real. Abbas has made it clear that he rejected it.  He does not want to give up on the ’67 lines,  part of Jerusalem and the “right of return”.  Let’s take him at his word. Israel should propose to El Sisi that the land be given to Israel in trust for the “refugees” on the condition that Israel would use their best efforts to prevent infiltration into Gaza and perhaps work with Egypt to pacify the Sinai. Thus both Egypt and Israel would get an immediate benefit. Israel could then build housing in the newly acquired territory and offer it to all “refugees” and other Arabs in Judea,  Samaria and Gaza, numbering according to UNRWA about 2 million. Overtime, Israel could make this work. Ted Belman

 

El-Sisi says it was his Muslim Brotherhood-backed predecessor who made the offer — not him.

No maps have been drawn yet, but one possible map of the Egyptian Sinai Initiative for Peace/Palestine (ESIPP) could look something like this – with a massive, coastal area from Sinai, contiguous to Gaza, being transferred to the Palestinian Authority for a state.
Photo Credit: Courtesy

Egypt’s Foreign Ministry says President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi never offered the Palestinian Authority a chance to establish a new state in the Sinai Peninsula, according to i24 News.

On Monday morning, Israel Army Radio had reported the Egyptian president had made the suggestion to to Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas earlier this week in Cairo.

The alleged proposal would have provided a tract of land 1,600 square kilometers (618 square miles) adjacent to Gaza, to “end the refugee story,” as Abbas told the Bethlehem-based Ma’an news agency.

The total area of the site – which would be controlled by the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas — is five times the area of Gaza. According to Israel Army Radio, the proposal has a green light from the United States, and Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was given a ‘heads up’ as well.

In exchange, the Palestinian Authority would end its demand for Israel to retreat to the 1949 Armistice Line – known internationally also as the “1967 border” after Israel won the 1967 Six Day War.

The broadcast report noted that el-Sisi reminded Abbas in their conversation that he is 80 years old. The Egyptian president allegedly warned the PA chairman that if he chose not to make history by accepting the proposal, “your successor will.”

Abbas, however, rejected the plan – much as his predecessor, former PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat once rejected a plan that would have given his people 97 percent of the territory in Judea and Samaria for which they have fought for so long.  Arafat instead insisted on holding out for land from Jerusalem, Israel’s eternal capital.

The Egyptian proposal is not really a new idea. In 1956, the Egyptian government proposed a similar concept. Then, too, it was rejected by the PLO.

“Now this is being proposed once again,” Abbas told a gathering of his Fatah faction in Ramallah on Sunday. “A senior leader in Egypt has said, ‘A refuge must be found for the Palestinians and we have all this open land.’ This was said to me personally. But it is illogical for the problem to be solved at Egypt’s expense. We won’t have it.”

The Egyptian Foreign Ministry claimed in its denial on Monday that the proposal was actually offered in the past by Muslim Brotherhood-backed former President Mohammed Morsi, deposed a year ago by el-Sisi.

Under the plan, Palestinian Authority-controlled cities in Judea and Samaria would remain autonomous and their residents would remain in their homes.

So-called “refugees” from abroad – who are now into the third and fourth and in some cases even fifth generations – could move to new homes in the proposed State of Palestine, adjacent to Gaza. There would be a considerable amount of seafront property in the tract being offered, enough for both real estate development, and for a port.

Just two main conditions were attached to the proposal: (1) the state be demilitarized, and (2) that cities in Judea and Samaria be autonomous, not the entire regions.

September 8, 2014 | 6 Comments »

Leave a Reply

6 Comments / 6 Comments

  1. Bear Klein Said:

    So the only solution is actually to defeat them. Not win a war on points but actually destroy them.

    This has been the lesson of history. In World War II Japan and Germany were totally vanquished and American military presence continues to this day. When will the GOI learn this, or will it continue to “do what it’s always done and get the results it’s always gotten?”

  2. This hypothetical solution to the conflict just like the Jordanian theoretical solution has one major flaw. The area would be become a staging area adjacent to Israel from which to attack Israel from. These people live to destroy Israel.

    So the only solution is actually to defeat them. Not win a war on points but actually destroy them.

    Part of this will entail throwing out or killing all jihadis. This Sinai deal will not happen.

    It would solve for Israel only that the international community for the most part would lose interest in the Israeli Palestinian conflict which already has lost a lot of interest. ISIS is now center stage.

  3. I am against such a plan based on the following considerations.

    A- Gaza must remain under Israeli control even without sovereignty.

    B- Natural gas and oil reserves off the coast of Gaza must become part of our energy preserve and not theirs.
    C- The potential area to be ceded to Palis in North Sinai encompass former Yamit and surrounding settlements evacuated and destroyed by Israel in 1982. Any action that would interfere with our eventual reoccupation is to be opposed.

    D- Enlarging areas under Palis control along and adjacent to our borders is asking for trouble where none yet exists.

    Can you imagine that instead of 30-50 tunnels under our border and border settlement there would be thousands? Allowing Missiles made by Palis and Hams to extend their areas of placement and manufacture is stupid.

    E-It would make Gaza/Sinai Palis enclave an existential threat where they are currently only a threat.

    F- It bases it’s preposition that our conflict is territorial and based only or mainly on placement of recognized borders. It’s not and never has been.

    G- It would be a sure prescription for a continuation of conflict leading to war at far greater cost to Israel in lives and treasure. Where in the end we will need re conquer and hold all the territories. No one can guarantee that Egypt would not participate in the Palis favor in a future war.

    Bad move even if it were feasible, which T-G, it’s not!!!!

    Israel gains nothing in such a maneuver!!!!

  4. The concept offers an intrinsic solution to the problems.
    I first heard about it over a year ago from a very good Internet Bulletin publisher from Australia, Steven Shamrak. Also by other solid Blogs.
    The plan is well worth pursuing and bring it to the forefront of the discourse.