By Ted Belman
Today I was involved in a strong exchange of ideas with Arlene Kushner and Nadia Matar of Women in Green. Nadia expounded on her philosophy,
My partner Yehudit Katsover and I came to the conclusion some 5 years ago that:
1) the battle on the ground is important and even crucial and WIG are doing it on a daily basis- but it’s not enough
2) that calling for Jewish building and expansion is important and even crucial –but it’s not enough
3) that declaring and proving that Israel belongs to the Jewish People and we arent occupiers is important and even crucial- but it’s not enough
4) that declaring that a two-state solution is complete suicide is important and even crucial- but it’s not enough
All these above things were done already before the expulsion from Gush Katif and N.Shomron and need to continue to be done but it’s not enoughWhat is lacking? we asked ourselves…… We wrecked our brains and Yehudit said it simply:
We MUST come up with an alternative to the Two-State solution.
That is what the people of Israel want to hear; that is what each and every person who we convince of the justness of our cause asks:
Ok, you convinced me that this is our land; ok you convinced me that the two-state solution is terrible, so what do you suggest??? What should be done? What is your alternative??
And to our shock and horror we realized that almost no one in our camp adressed that issue…
yes, a few tsaddikim did adress it- Mike Wise and friends already callled for Sovereignty twenty years ago-
but they did not turn it into a big campaign
And that is what we are trying to do- if we manage to raise the funds-change the public consciousness from being focused on the negative two-state solution to the positive sovereignty solution. That is why we already arranged 3 big conferences and just came out with our Sovereignty journal.
Our two campaigns have very different focuses. Your Levy report campaign is, if I undertsand it correctly, more focused on convincing the Israeli politicians to accept the Levy Report- and I pray you succeed and wish you hatzlacha..
Our campaign is focused also on the politicians but also on the public, with the idea that if the public starts talking about it more and more-it will reach the ears of the politicians too. That is why we distributed 100,000 journals in hebrew and 10,000 in English. The reactions by the people were unbelievably positive. There is a thirst for an alternative to the two-state solution. The replies we got were: finally someone is saying what should be done-where have you been till now… and thus dear Arlene, Women in Green will continue this campaign on as many fronts as we can raise funds.
I don’t want you to feel that we are competing, for we are two separate campaigns and we should wish each other hatzlacha /
May all those working for the safeguarding of the Land of Israel succeed, please G-d.
Arlene Kushner and Jeff Daube of the ZOA are presently lobbying Knesset members to embrace the Levy Report. Their Plan is well thought out. They have hired a lobbyist who is well versed in the need for and the issues involved in accepting the Levy Report. They believe it is a stepping stone to sovereignty.
There is already a Palestine Texas. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qy2cuMl1xPM
My idea is Argentina or Uruguay which has more open space. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N62G9D0uwoM Rosario Argentina
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-aO1KbNX50 Arabs in Rosario
HOW ABOUT ARTIGAS URUGUAY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agWAuL95t5A
Twice the size of J&S similar subtropical climate (only much more rain)
Only 80,000 Uruguayans live the province. Most are poor, and could be paid to leave.
Artigas would make a nice country for the Palestinians.
But you would have to pay Uruguay to sell the province.
Or is Uruguay somehow responsible for the Inquisition or Holocaust, and you feel they owe you the money?
Condoleezza Rice: send Palestinian refugees to South America
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/24/condoleezza-rice-palestinian-refugees-south-america
Herzl once considered planting Jews in Argentina instead of the Mideast. So the idea is not so crazy.
CuriousAmerican Said:
As usual you get things wrong and mixed up: the phrases are “elephant in the room” and “bull in a china shop”
CuriousAmerican Said:
A complete set of myths in one paragraph. the status quo is not a disaster for Israelis, it gives them control of YS and the pals. Let them bristle, they have bristled for decades and would bristle even if no jews were there, they are a non constructive collective of “bristlers”, who cares? bantuization is working fine for Israelis. Hostile people resisting is nothing new. Everything you say is pure rubbish with no basis in fact.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Much to disagree with here.
At the moment the Civil Administration runs Area C according to the laws as they existed when they won the territory. ie, Jordanian law, and Ottoman law is still in force. Extending sovereignty means to apply Israeli law. This is very important because Area C has 350,000 Jewish Israelis there.
You are so wrong to liken the situation there to our sovereignty. Far from it we are bound by foreign laws and the humanitarian laws of the FGC. We can’t amend the law but we can change it to Israeli law. We would then reject that the FGC applies. This is in accordance with the Levy Report.
Yes the Gazans are not entirely free but why should they be. They are waging war against us.
The Oslo Accords limit our entry save in specific situations. So we can’t enter when ever we want.
Israel does not control everything. Our only control in A and B is that in B we have a role in security. But as for criminal law or broadcasting or virtually everything its the Arabs that are in charge.
You are demanding full rights for the Palestinians and ignoring that all limitations are justified. From my point of view we give them too much rights. We allow them to incite and demonize us. We must be crazy.
Stop lying you.
You know very well that the Euros, the UN and the Arabs will not pay.
If you want the Arabs out, Israel will have to pay.
If you can get Christians to contribute, then fine. I will chip in a donation to such a fund.
If you can get the Saud family to fund it, even better.
But you know that in the end, Jews will have to pay for most of it.
No one says this is just; just realistic.
@ CuriousAmerican:
Where are from Minnesota, maybe you start a town in the open spaces and call it Palestine and the local Arabs to move there. I am sure they will jump at the chance.
Thanks!
I did not say it was palatable. I said it was realistic.
XLucid Said:
the problem with the jordan, or egyptian, option in a unilateral transfer is that it would break the peace treaty and create war with Jordan & egypt. They would have no choice. Only if Israel is willing to initiate war with Jordan or Jordan initiates with Israel does that become a good option. the good thing about Jordan is that it is close to area a & b and fleeing pals cold make there own way. One good thing about gaza, lebanon and syria is that none of them have a peace treaty with Israel and breaking truces with them is easy. A good thing about gaza and lebanon is that pushing, or transporting, a lot of pals across the borders would destabilize both entities and create civil war. It is possible that the GCC Sunnis would clandestinely work with Israel to create a sunni lebanon and drive the shias out of control there. similarly with Syria but Syria is a stronger national govt which can call on the soviets. On the other hand pushing the pals into western syria and lebanon would give the sunnis control of western syria and lebanon. This might sit well with the GCC for pipelines etc. With gaza, dumping a lot of fatah would make sense so that they kill each other for a while. All those who came under Oslo should be sent to gaza in a first phase using breach of oslo as an excuse to send tem back out. the good thing about gaza is that it has been abandoned by Israel and is the site of Phillistia(palestine). They have a state there now and it is purely a matter of whether they get more than that.
except under war I expect that Israel is not yet ready for forced unilateral transfer and therefore believe that the priories should be to settle jews massively in area C, possibly annex C now or later, declare that A & B must remain in status quo because the pals have not demonstrated enough movement from being a hostile collective. There is no legal obligation for Israel to create a “viable pal state” or any pal state for that matter. Israel went there in a defensive war and can annex territory legally on that basis aside from the claims of the jewish people. Israels only obligation is to protect its citizens from the hostile alien population. Further it should be stated to all that the continued reference to illegal and illegitimate settlement will force Israel to execute its rights unilaterally. There is no reason to even be in negotiations or to observe any road map towards any pal sovereignty on the jewish homeland. Its all a myth and israel should begin, as did bennet, in repudiating the myth of illegitimate or illegal jewish settlement in YS. Where does the notion come from that uninhabited, vacant land in YS belongs to the arabs; the opposite should be declared. Everything that is wrong and is a problem results from Israel subscribing to the foreign myths and libels and that is why the beginning must be the repudiation of those libels and myths. From that starting point each step then becomes clear. The only way that any arabs could remain is at Israels leave and magnanimity. China did not leave tibet. Until Jews are educated to view YS as morally and legally belonging to them they will not accept annexation or transfer. There is no reasonable argument that vacant land in YS should go to arabs instead of Jews. That is a beginning.
Are you insane?
Where did you get that number.
1) The number was closer to 750,000
Arabs try to make it a million, now you deflated it to 450,00
2) 800 Billion. Using your figures, that is almost $2 million per arab.
Using the 5 Million Palestinians in the Mideast that is still about $160,000 per Arab or about $800,000 per family of five. Even if we divide that by 65 years, that would be $12 K per year for a family of five.
Think about that. That is averaged. 12K per family 40 years ago would have made them rich. If most of that came recently, they would still be doing well.
That number is outrageous. Come up with your source for that.
Israel should with the new revenues from gas and investments phase out the USA the financial aid it receives. This provides far greater independence for all sorts of decisions. When you take money for people their always a quid quo pro.
This allows greater flexibility when it makes sense to build certain weapons in Israel in lieu of the US or buy in Europe.
Having agreed the TSS is a disaster is only step one.
The second step is agreeing the status quo is a disaster.
By status quo I mean Israeli military law over the Palestinians. Administrative detenetion. et al. People bristle under administrative law.
The third step is to realize the Bantuization of Palestinians into non-contiguous zones will not work. Putting them in Palestinian reservations will not work. Hostile people resist.
So you have a hostile population. You either absorb them; or get them to leave.
If the latter, how you do it is critical.
This is why I recommend compensated relocation.
Let’s face it, if J&S was empty when Israel captured it in 1967, it would have been annexed immediately, just as Jerusalem was annexed.
So the problem is not the TSS. The problem is the elephant in the china shop (the Palestinians).
Changing the Israeli position will mean NOTHING until you deal with the Palestinians. It will be the same situation under a different name or law.
The Sovereignty Camp is just asking that the de facto situation be made de jure.
In reality, Israel controls everything she won in 1967, except the Sinai.
The PA is a legal fiction. Israel enters in whenever she wants.
Gaza is not exactly under Israeli control; but not exactly free either. Israel controls the coast and air space.
So the Sovereignty Camp is not asking for anything new, but just that it be made official.
Okay, I have no problems with the Sovereignty View; but until the elephant in the china shop (the Palestinians) are dealt with; nothing has changed on the ground.
If tomorrow morning Israel took the sovereignty position, how would anything change for the Palestinians?
It wouldn’t.
They are under martial law … already
They are denied permits … already.
They are subject to Israeli Forces already.
Maybe you should make the conquest of victory of 1967 official, but until the Palestian issue is deal with, nothing will change.
Hello! Listen.
I never asked anyone to be kicked out.
My plan.
First: Pay the Palestinian young to leave to South America
Second: Annex and enfranchise the rest slowly.
Some 450,000 Arabs fled further to the Independence war.
They received more than 800 billions dollars as at today.
Some 850,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries.
They received 0 dollar as at today.
Therefore, as soon as Jews receive all the hundreds of billions of dollars of compensation from all Arab countries, then Israel will be in a better position to consider a compensation for Arabs. Until then, they will receive nothing.
@ CuriousAmerican:
I’m not big on the Jew’s having to pay. The Arabs didn’t pay when they expelled 800,000 Jews and confiscated their property but the numbers suggest it would be a bargain when one considers what it cost and continues to cost the GOI expelling close to 10,000 Jews. Add to that what the costs are in security and subsidies we pay these Arabs, it would be a bargain!
@ CuriousAmerican:
But its ok to kick Jews out of their homes, which the world in fact demands to be done in Judea/Samaria and eastern Jerusalem and as was done and applauded by the world in Gaza. Why the double standard?
@ yamit82:
I hate Amanpour.
Since you are a man of logic: Do you really think the Arabs will pay?
I am sure Christians would contribute; but utlimately Jews will pay. I do not say this is justice. I say this will work.
I do not like that Jews will pay; but nothing else will work.
What are you talking about? Are you paranoid?
I support annexing Area C in first stage. Mike Wise argues for annexation of all and the granting of citizenship to qualified Arabs. Caroline Glick agrees. Martin Sherman is totally against giving citizenship. He is committed to compensated voluntary emigration. Sherman is against annexing only Area C because its like swiss cheese. How ouyld Israel protect their border.
Once we start annexing then that’s the end of Oslo and the rules for A, B and C. We should simply draw a border where we want it and build a fence. Then we can offer autonomy on what is left and spend the next decade negotiating autonomy. It will de facto autonomy as no agreement is necessary.
Transfer would be a great idea and I would be all for it but for the already heavy and increasing daily anti-Israel sentiment world-wide. I dread thinking about the repercussions. A much more workable solution would be annexation of Area C with massive Jewish settlement. Israel should declare that the Arabs of Areas A&B are considered by the state to be Jordanian citizens. Isn’t that just what they were before Jordan illegally revoked their citizenship? Why does Israel have to recognize an illegal and immoral Jordanian dictate? This would be the answer to the apartheid argument. Those Arabs could then remain in Areas A&B as alien residents so long as they behaved themselves and if they didn’t, they’d have a one-way ticket to Jordan. Surrounded by by a thriving Jewish nation with limited opportunities for self expression, they might choose to relocate to a more favorable local and a newly minted Ministry of Arab Emigration would be there to facilitate their move and even to Bernard’s chagrin, with financial aid and incentives. Once the population is diminished enough annexation of Areas A&B could proceed.
@ Yamit :
“The only case for minimal security is transfer and annexation of at least up to the Jordan“.
I fully agree with you to transfer all of them, including those in Israel, and I am wondering why the Jordan option is not on the agenda of the nationalist camp.
As to the legal matters, they are only an umbrella against any wave of protests triggered by the anti-patriotic and self-destructive leftists.
Israel: David’s Sling missile interceptor passes important test
Designed to counter mid-range ballistic missiles, system could be operational as soon as next year.
WATCH: David’s Sling missile defense system goes on display for first time
Co-manufacturer Rafael say the system is designed to complement the Iron Dome defensive shield used in the Gaza conflict, and will be operational within two years.
Israel’s New Missile Defense System Passes Test
@ Ted Belman:
XLucid Said:
The only case important to most Israelis is Security. The only case for minimal security is transfer and annexation of at least up to the Jordan.
Devil in the details, easiest way is to prod the arabs into a massive intifada and use it with preplanned ruthless efficiency to depopulate the West Bank. If Jordan can take in a million Iraqi, and Syrian refugees they can take in a million Palis as can Lebanon and Egypt/Gaza. Do it quickly with speed of a week or two and immediately create a fait accompli
Legal arguments will have little effect and building up the Palis economy is insane. The same as shooting ourselves in the foot.
Explain to Israelis that due to the threat of Iranian Nukes and earth quakes. The heavy concentration of Israeli population must be diversified and built in single or duplex housing (earthquake proof). We Need all of the West Bank and more to insure our survivability. Security promises of our civilian and military leaders since 1967 have not exactly inspired confidence that any promised security red lines and will be held in the future any more than they have been in the past and present.
First things First——————–DIVEST FROM AMERICA!! That will force Israel to make decisions based on a different set of realities, force our economy to adjust accordingly but it will also open doors and directions not yet considered or acted upon. There will always be options.
CuriousAmerican Said:
LOL, where are they and who cares about them? Those that are troublesome are busy dying in egypt, libya, tunisia, sinai,lebanon, syria. See, they have appropriate places to go designed specifically for their desires.
CuriousAmerican Said:
The implementation of expulsion and transfer has less practical problems and is a longer term sustainable solution. Plus it has side benefits in that money given now to arab terror would have to be given to them after they cross the border to resettle them. If they don’t pay them to resettle then the entities in which they arrive will be submerged in a civil war and blood bath. Either path is ok once they are out. You chat rubbish. The only real obstruction to transfer is the will of the Israeli and Jewish people to accept it as being the moral, legal, practical,sustainable, permanent, solution. Once the Jews accept it then all else will naturally flow. The problem is to get the Jews to accept their own rights to YS and recognise the impossibility of peace with the arabs and rights of Jews at the same time. You appear to be intent on cajoling the jews to reach into their pocket, to go to their banks, to cough up the dough. I know that your real purpose is not your overtly stated purpose: if you remove the Jews from paying for resettlement then you will not continue to carry that banner. You could be carrying a much more logical banner to the arabs to pay but your agenda is that JEWS PAY. Perhaps it is a way of getting the Jews to pay for other transgressions which you have not identified here?
CuriousAmerican Said:
stop lying, no one is against their being compensated to leave but only if the Jews do not do the compensating. Euros, UN, arabs and others may compensate them. You can be sure if they were transferred across the borders, then the internationals would compensate them and find them new homes to avoid those receivers from being submerged in civil wars. the best solution: transfer across the borders and then the delegitimizers will pay the price they choose. War may force the issue if the Jews have the sense to seize opportunities.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Actually thanks for the reminder as to expulsion being a great idea:
The young can remember all they want outside of the boundaries of Israel. The pal refugees in lebanon, syria, jordan are giving no problem to Israel. Only those in gaza and the west bank. therefore, what is demonstrated is that pals outside of Israel will be less of a problem than those in Israel. Furthermore, it is better to deal with an enemy outside than inside. the only problem with BG’s expulsion is that it was not completed. If they were all out everything would now be solved. Only those left behind are a problem because they were not expelled
Your ludicrous and reptitive attempts to frighten the jews into paying arabs to leave are transparent. Forceful expulsion would be the ideal, and easily accomplished to gaza, lebanon or syria where no benefit of treaty exists for those hostiles but until then the jew killers should be kept in cages like any rabid animal. Therefore, for now annex C, settle it with jews and keep A & B locked up until they run away from lack of attention or fear of the Jews. Gaza can remain if peaceful or they can be converted into fleeing boat people.
Sounds good.
1) Where do you intend to send them to.
Jordan will not take them. Egypt will not take them. Syria will not take them. Lebanon cannot take them.
You have a peace treaty with two of those nations, and a truce with the other two.
2) Do you think there will be no blowback?
Israel would be embargoed, and boycotted like South Africa. Israeli exports would stop, because few would buy them. High unemployment in Israel; with a concommitant exodus back into the diaspora to get work.
Your idea sounds great on paper; but the implementation has problems.
Now you know why I suggest compensated relocation.
On paper expulsion sounds easy.
There was an expulsion under Ben Gurion. Ben Gurion thought it was a neat solution.
Well, unfortunately, the young did NOT forget.
There are better ways to handle the problem than by expulsion (kick out).
Compensated relocation is one.
Many here think I am being hostile when I recommend compensated relocation.
Actually, I have thought this through for over a decade. Compensated relocation is the least problematic solution.
Kick out the arabs.
Liberman: It’s time for Israel to look for allies other than the United States
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Liberman-Its-time-for-Israel-to-look-for-allies-other-than-the-United-States-332385
Bear Klein Said:
I agree: annex and/or settle area C immediately and keep the current status of A & B under military occupation. The US did not withdraw from Germany or Japan until the Germans and Japanese were strong allies of the US. The pals have not demonstrated they are ready for peace and therefore withdrawal is pre mature, even more so under current events. it is only the illogical pressure of the internationals that even makes this an issue to have any consideration whatsoever. The focus should be on what the Pals demonstrate to warrant that they be given peace. the military occupier has no need to demonstrate anything. Bennet stated: Unless the Pals do ….. they cannot expect peace. This is a paradigm shift which should be encouraged, the shifting of focus and responsibility to the pals in order to move forward in negotiations. The internationals must be sabotaged in their efforts and confronted as Bennet did.
Bear Klein Said:
Well said, a practical man,often lacking on this post.
@ CuriousAmerican:
No disprespect, but in the 70s I spent a lot of time talking to people who had helped expedite the British leaving “Palestine” before it became Israel and then fighting in the War of Independence. What mattered then and what matters now is what the Jews do.
Of course it would be nice to solve all of the problems and have a billion Muslims and 400 million or so Arabs make peace with us but this is not happening anytime soon. So in spite of problems you move ahead with the state of Israel and solve what issues you can when you can.
Mr. Belman said :
“What we want to do is to convince the Israeli public that we are right.”
There are three important subject matters that the Israeli public might be worried about: (i) security matters, (ii) legal rights, and (iii) economic aspects.
If there is a consensus among the nationalist camp that Arabs represent for the Israeli public a burden and a source of troubles, then all three concerns may be fulfilled by and convey towards one statement “Separation“, which will be an endeavour that will serve to rally all the nationalist camp.
In order to reach out to the general public and to have the greatest impact for the most people, all these three matters should be presented to the Israeli public in a clear and detailed way.
@ Ted Belman:
1. So creating an Israeli consensus that no Palestinian State will take hold is massive.
2, Building Building Building in all parts of Judah and Samaria is massive including as soon as possible expanding Maleh Adumim into(E1).
3. Annexing as much of Judah and Samaria as will pass in the Knesset as soon possible. If all settlements or all of
Area C. Trying for too much at once will fail.
The sovereignty Camp is well aware of all these issues. We don’t have a concensus yet other than the creation of a Palestinian state is a bad idea. What we want to do is to convince the Israeli public that we are right. Whether we do it (annexation) in stages or whether we give citizenship or compensation for voluntary emigration are all on the table for discussion. But what is not on the table is the creation of Palestine.
@ CuriousAmerican:
Lucky? WoW! If it wasn’t for bad luck I guess we wouldn’t have any luck at all!!
Perhaps there will soon be enough of us who don’t care about ‘explaining to the world’
You are lucky you are fighting Arabs. Half of Israeli Arabs do not even vote.
They are 20% of the population, but only half vote. If they all voted for Baladi, Israeli would be in a fix.
Swing votes can often rule democracies.
It all boils down to this. You have hostile Arabs in your midst.
Nothing Israel does will have any effect until the Palestinians are dealt with.
Confining them to Areas A&B will not bring peace. You will never be able to explain to the world why Arabs inside Israel can vote while those in A&B cannot.
You know my view. Compensated relocation.
Others have more vigorous suggestions.
In the end, all ideas will collapse until you deal with the elephant in the China Shop
yamit82 Said:
this suggests an understanding that a final deal will not be reached but somehow the 9 mos is important. Originally that was the red line time for Iran but it also comes near to the mid-term US election. I think the dems are working to get both houses and in such a scenario their constituency is anti-war so perhaps it’s geared for either Israel making the attack or a diplomatic deal worked out in time for the election. BB could even be in on it, that when it comes out he agrees.
yamit82 Said:
It looks as if the US and russia made a deal to stay out and leave it to the proxies.. There is going to be this “peace” conference but perhaps the outcome was already decided. No one is still taking the chemicals. I’ll bet that if someone gave Assad a few billion, he wold retire. If it didnt look so real I would say that Obama’s stance is a sham, why would he work for all that time with Turkey, jordan, GCC to arm and train their jihadis to drop them now. It is possible that he wants to appear to be a sensible anti war president but all that was known before. Unless the US was never meant to do the attack. Even the morsi thing looks suspect. The greatest thing for sisi credibility is his anti us stance. I don’t buy this MB narrative because saudi and qatar were on the same page and are still working fine together. MB, al qaeda, salafis were all going together to Syria. I am wondering if they just got rid of the top leadership of the egypt MB because they did not follow the plan and wanted to be independent, loose cannons. Conflict is often manufactured. there could even be a deal where everybody walks away with something that each is satisfied with. What about China in all this, right now china gets cheaper fuel from iran. The whole thing is suspicious.
yamit82 Said:
Obama knew his health care bill was going to be ailure,soooooo he tried to star alittle war to distrct the USA.
Now that I have explained US foreigh policy, I have decided to run off with B Ross cause you nave neglected me.
@ bernard ross:
There is no way in Hell Abbas could agree to an offer for the same or less than he rejected from Olmert. There is no way the current government would ever agree to those terms.
Abbas has no legitimate standing among most palis and almost none in Gaza. At home is is no more than the mayor of Ramallah and everything else is a myopic fiction which Israel helps to maintain and support including insuring Abbas stays in office. We allow him and his cronies to stay in Power and steal as many billions as they can gt away with if they can maintain and keep lid on the most radical elements. The last thing Abbas wants is a recognized Palis state, he wouldn’t last a month if not bumped off before that. He keeps the fiction alive because it brings in the dough. Any reader of events in our region knows that a palis state even with all of the West Bank would never be economically viable especially if Israel cuts their life lines. Why would anyone invest in them?
I have the feeling there might have been an understanding and that Obama double crossed everybody especially BB and the Saudis. Jarrett has been in negotiations with Iran for a year and many of the sanctions have already been eased. Europe wants a deal Obama wants a deal and Iran wants a deal so there will be a deal. The conflict between Abass and BB is who will be blamed for the failure of the talks. If the Palis are blamed they could face congressional sanctions and defending. The EU is getting tired of funding the crooks as well although their voices are muted.
Notice how Syria is mostly a non news event today although not much is changing?
yamit82 Said:
I posted the same on another page. I liked his statement regarding you cant occupy your own home AND how they cannot expect peace unless they recognize israel(not from the point of recognition but that it implied that Israel does not need peace and shifted the onus to them) I think that israel should say there can be no peace or end to occupation until after they prove themselves(just like germany and japan) In other words “we’ll look at it later”.
Dempsey: If Israel strikes Iran, the US will meet its obligations
DEBKAfile November 19, 2013, 11:52 AM (GMT+02:00)
Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Monday that if Israel were to strike Iran in an effort to damage the country’s nuclear program, the United States would meet “some defined obligations” to the Middle East nation. He added: “I feel like we have a deep obligation to Israel. That is why we are in constant contact and collaboration.” In a talk to the Wall Street Journal CEO Council, Gen. Dempsey credited Israel with being “an example of what could be” in the Middle East. “If we had one of my Israeli counterparts sitting here, they would tell you that most of the Arabs living in Israel have a better life than the Arabs living in the rest of the region and that is true,” he said.
Published on Nov 18, 2013
Video:
CNN’s Christiane Amanpour speaks with Natfali Bennett, Israel’s Minister of Economy and member of security cabinet.
Poll: Majority of Israeli Arabs Reject Israel’s Right to be Jewish
70% of Israeli Arabs do not accept Israel’s right to have a Jewish majority, a new poll conducted by Haifa University and the Israel Democracy Institute has revealed.
The poll, which posed questions to 1,400 Jewish and Arab Israelis over a ten-year period, revealed that, despite the overwhelming rejection of Israel’s Jewish character, 55% of Arab Israelis would prefer to live there than anywhere else, though a large majority, 68%, say they fear being transferred out of the country. An increasingly radical Arab population was one of the revelations of the poll. About 58% of the Arab citizens of Israel say that Palestinian Arabs would be justified in starting an intifada if the diplomatic process fails.
70% of Israeli Arabs believe that the government of Israel discriminates against them and likewise advocate for an intifada if their situation does not improve.
75% of Jewish respondents believe that Arabs deserve equal rights as a minority in the country, 69% blame the Arabs for prolonging the conflict between the two peoples, and a large majority, 78%, believe that the country must maintain a Jewish majority.
@ yamit82:
Do you think that there is any possibility that these talks are a sham that is meant to keep the Pal issue of the media, keep them quiet for 9 mos. and that the end may be that everyone walks away? I was thinking that in a situation like that Abbas may have said that , other than the 4 bill he cannot leave failed talks unless he has the prisoners released and maybe thats the reason the prisoners were released. They would not have need a prisoner release for talks expected to succeed. I still believe the plan was that the GCC leash hamas, weaken Irans proxies to mitigate blowback to Israel as a deal with Israel or at the behest of the US. I just keep thinking that these talks are pre worked out re the outcome and that they were meant to cover for an Iran “deal” if diplomacy doesn’t work. It may be that the diplomacy is acover for obama, that it was even pre arranged that the US was not necessary to attack Iran. GCC , kurds , baluchis and azeris can be activated internally and the syrian jihadis moved to lebanon, iraq then iran. I read that syrian jihadis are already moving to iraq and there are battles in lebanon.
yamit82 Said:
thats the jewish public but 60% of 80% = 48% less than half
Yaalon: The PA is No Different from Hamas
“I have yet to hear one Palestinian leader recognize Israel’s right to exist,” says Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon.
Most Israelis oppose peace deal with land swaps, poll finds Los Angeles Times
Poll: Majority of Israelis Oppose Concessions
Survey by Israel Democracy Institute reveals wide public support for referendum on any peace deal, opposition to more Israeli concessions.
Territorial concessions
The poll also showed that a significant majority of Jewish Israelis are opposed to further territorial concessions. 62.5% opposed a comprehensive withdrawal from Judea, Samaria and much of Jerusalem with land swaps, while 58% opposed evacuating all Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria apart from Maaleh Adumim and the city of Ariel, as well as large “settlement blocs.” 50% oppose transferring control over Arab neighbourhoods of Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority, with a special arrangement for holy places.
Survey: Most Israeli Jews wouldn’t give Palestinians vote if West Bank was annexed
Survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews.
A majority also explicitly favors discrimination against the state’s Arab citizens, a survey shows.
The survey, conducted by Dialog on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, exposes anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews. The survey was commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund and is based on a sample of 503 interviewees.
Ted, when you say sovereignty do you mean annexation. YS can have sovereignty as a separate state(Judea)from Israel. Which is it?
In any fight for soveriegnty the question is what about the arabs. I do not believe in citizenship in Israel for the arabs of A & B, maybe the few in C, as there is no basis to absorb a hostile population. Further why not leave A & B as remaining under occupation until a future date because at this time the west bank arabs show no signs of being able to peacefully coexist with Israelis in the same state or in a separate state; they have not matured culturally for peace. Furthermore A & B is also disputed even if not immediately annexed. In any case Israel should repudiate the notion that aggressive hostiles who prove there incapability for peace must be given any solution other than the current one. They must prove themselves first just like has happened in any former occupied territory of war. As they continue terror and incitement they are proving they are not ready, first THEY prove readiness then there are talks. Israel must shift the burden for desiring “peace” onto them, Israel does not need to be in a rush for “peace”. That is the myth of the internationals. If THEY want peace let them prove it through their actions. Bennet appeared to be shifting the burden for desiring peace onto them in his interview with Amanpour, a good idea. Israel should simply state the pals have not proven they are ready for peace or withdrawal. (I haven’t mentioned my desired goal of transfer because I think the Israelis are not yet ready to demand that)
Does not solve problem of Arabs particularly the 1.5 million or so living in Area A/B.
The plan needs to start with Area C only for sovereignty if anyone wants any realistic chance of Israelis agreeing to implement it. I understand this does not yet adequately solve Area A/B. These areas will need a different plan.
Do this in stages.
If we refer to Article 25 – which was afterwards fraudulently added to the Mandate for Palestine – we may recall that Jordan was intended to be the Arab state, and Jews was prohibited to live there.
In order to partially comply with the terms and conditions of the Mandate, the remaining portion of the Land was deemed to be a substitution to the borders initially stipulated in the Mandate.
We may also recall that the fraudulent dismemberment of the Land in favour of Jordan occurred pursuant to the memorandum called “Transjordan Memorandum dated September 16, 1922:
The following are some excerpts thereof:
“1. Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine provides as follows:
“In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provision of this Mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15, 16 and 18.
2. In pursuance of the provisions of this Article, His Majesty’s Government invite the Council to pass the following resolution:
“The following provisions of the Mandate for Palestine are not applicable to the territory known as Trans-Jordan, which comprises all territory lying to the east of a line drawn from a point two miles west of the town of Akaba on the Gulf of that name up the centre of the Wady Araba, Dead Sea and River Jordan to its junction with the River Yarmuk; thence up the centre of that river to the Syrian Frontier.”
Considering that the Palestinian Authority will never abandon its claims with respect to Judea and Samaria territories, therefore despite its illegal occupation of the Land of Israel, the Jordan option remain the best of the worst solution.
Thus, appropriate legal measures should be taken to implement the provisions of the Transjordan Memorandum of 1922 so that Arabs should be directed towards Jordan.
The foregoing solution will be neither a one-state nor a two state solution. The purpose will only be to implement what was initially intended, and it will be the most everlasting, achievable and lawfully based solution.