With a new U.S. president, new ideas are emerging on how to resolve the Israel-Palestine debacle. One of the most promising comes from the Jordanian Opposition Council who favor a new Palestinian state — in Jordan.
The GOP unanimously approved a pro-Israel platform at their convention in July 2016 which stipulated:
“The U.S. seeks to assist in the establishment of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, to be negotiated among those living in the region,”
David Friedman and Jason Greenblatt, representing Donald Trump, participated in the drafting and were in complete agreement with the final text.
Gone was any reference to the Palestinian people or to a two-state solution. In addition, the platform included the words “We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier.” If not an “occupier,” then presumably Israel is a sovereign.
Accordingly, the search is on for an alternate solution. Such a solution could take inspiration from the short-lived Feisal/Weizmann Agreement of 1919. The essence of this agreement was that Palestine as it then was, was to be divided into two states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. Chaim Weizmann on behalf of the Jews agreed to help develop the Arab state and Emir Feisal agreed to welcome Jewish settlement in the Jewish state and favored friendly cooperative relations.
Although the British didn’t breathe life into this agreement, they did separate Trans-Jordan from Palestine in 1922 with the Jordan River being the boundary between them. Trans-Jordan (Jordan) thus got 78% of the lands promised to the Jews. The remaining 22% consisting of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean was to be the Jewish state. This was enshrined in the Palestine Mandate signed by the League of Nations in 1922.
On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
With respect to the Arabs living in Jewish Palestine, the Congressional Record contained the following:
“(2) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, they shall be required to sell their lands at a just valuation and retire into the Arab territory which has been assigned to them by the League of Nations in the general reconstruction of the countries of the east.
(3) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, under conditions of right and justice, or to sell their lands at a just valuation and to retire into their own countries, they shall be driven from Palestine by force.”
The US was not a member of the League of Nations at this time. In order to be able to protect American interests in Palestine, she entered into the 1924 Anglo-American Convention in which the U.S. bound itself to the terms of the Mandate. This of course meant the recognition of Jewish right to close settlement of Palestine and that all of Palestine was to be the Jewish homeland.
Since then, there were a number of unsuccessful attempts, contrary to the terms of the Mandate, to further divide Jewish Palestine into two states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181, passed in 1947, recommended partition, but was rejected by the Arabs. The Jews on the other hand took advantage of it and declared their independence in 1948. Israel owes its independence to that declaration and not to Resolution 181, which was only a recommendation, precipitating the move.
Nothing has happened of any legal consequence since, to cancel the right of the Jews to settle and be sovereign over all the land to the Jordan River.
To date Israel has been reluctant to claim sovereignty over these lands as the Arabs living there would then demand citizenship resulting in a binational state. This is unacceptable to most Israelis. They also reject the two-state solution.
So what is the alternative?
Consider for a moment, that if Jordan agrees to grant citizenship to all Palestinians, as their law currently provides, and invites the return of all of them to live and work in Jordan, the conflict would soon be ended. While King Abdullah isn’t about to do so, the Jordan Opposition Coalition (JOC) would. This coalition represents all opposition groups in Jordan that back a secular state. The JOC since its creation six years ago has supported good relations with Israel. It does not include groups that support terrorism. This alliance has agreed to work together in order to form the government of Jordan should King Abdullah abdicate. Although at least 75% of Jordanians are Palestinians, the King has disenfranchised them to a great extent in favor of the ethnic Hashemites and Bedouins.
The JOC has produced a detailed plan, Operation “Jordan in Palestine,” which clearly identifies their goals and the operational steps needed to implement their plan. Copies are available upon request.
All that is necessary for this to come to pass is for the U.S. to instruct the king, who currently spends most of his time outside Jordan, to not return home. Then it would arrange for the Jordanian army, which it controls, to support the next popular Palestinian uprising, and to designate who among them would form the interim government.
The JOC, puts it this way:
This plan seeks to execute a feasible two-state solution where Jordan is the natural homeland for all Palestinians, and Israel becomes sovereign over all soil west to the River Jordan. This could only happen if the corrupt, terror-supporting and double-speaking Hashemite royal family leaves Jordan. The Palestinians often revolt against the regime but the king’s police force puts them down. The American media ignore this solution to the unrest in Jordan.
What is needed is for the U.S. to influence the Jordanian army and security agency to stand with the revolution the next time it breaks out. The security agencies and army are already securing the country without any influence from the king who is mostly abroad. Under these conditions, the king would not return. Once that happens an interim government of secular Palestinians who want peace with Israel could be appointed.
Once the interim government is installed, it will strengthen the economy by stopping theft of government money and ending corruption. It will fully enfranchise the Palestinians. All Palestinians around the world would be welcomed to return to Jordan pursuant the current Jordanian citizenship act, which already recognizes all Palestinians as citizens of Jordan. Many Palestinians will emigrate to Jordan in part because many have family members and friends living in Jordan. Work opportunities as well as a rewarding benefits/welfare system will be made available to them by the new interim government as further inducement.
Israel, with many international partners, including the U.S., could finance the building of a new Jordanian city of 1 million people. This would greatly stimulate the Jordanian economy and would provide work for the returning Palestinians. The new homes could be made available to the returnees and locals at subsidized prices further incentivizing people to return. The ending of King Abdullah’s discrimination against Palestinians living in Jordan, would also contribute to making Jordan a desired immigration destination.
Michael Ross, a Republican, wrote after the election of Donald Trump, “Trump Must Speak to Mudar Zahran“ because Zahran offers the alternate solution that Pres Trump is looking for.
As part of this solution, all Palestinian refugees enrolled with UN Relief And Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East could be repatriated to Jordan and given citizenship. Thus UNRWA could be wound up and the current UNRWA funding could be transferred to Jordan to assist in the resettlement.
According to Moshe Feiglin, the head of the Zehut Party in Israel, the Oslo Accords have cost Israel over 1 trillion shekels since they were signed. In addition, Israel has borne the cost of three military campaigns in Gaza. Finally, Israel supplies to the Palestinians their energy, water and sewage treatment for free or at greatly subsidized prices.
Last summer, Feiglin proposed a Solution in which Israel extends Israeli law from the Mediterranean to the Jordan:
We will give the Arab population in those territories three options: The first is voluntary emigration with the aid of a generous emigration grant. The second is permanent residency, similar to the “Green Card” status in the US – not like what is currently the practice in East Jerusalem. This status will be offered to those Arabs who publicly declare their loyalty to the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish Nation. We will safeguard their human rights and will not do anything like we did to ourselves in Gush Katif. The third option will be reserved for relatively few Arabs, and only in accordance with Israeli interests. Those who tie their fate to the fate of the Jewish Nation, like the Druze, can enter a long-term process of attaining citizenship.
Martin Sherman has published a similar plan which he calls the “Humanitarian Solution” as opposed to a strictly political solution. He summarized all his writings in support of such a plan and published them here.
With an estimated $300,000 per family grant, both he and Feiglin have estimated that incentivized compensated emigration will cost Israel over $200 billion USD but both argue it is feasible and worth doing.
The repatriation of Palestinians to Jordan, as proposed by JOC, would greatly facilitate the Palestinian emigration and greatly reduce the grants needed to incentivize it. UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority would both be wound up.
1.75 million Palestinians live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank). The 800,000 Arabs in Hebron, Nablus, Ramallah, and Bethlehem could remain there as Jorandian citizens. Ramallah is only 42 miles from Amman, the capital of Jordan. A new highway could be built connecting all these cities to Amman. The rest would have to be transferred to Jordan.
The 1.8 million Palestinians living in Gaza, of which 1.3 million are registered as refugees, would be incentivized to emigrate to Jordan. After enough leave, Israel could extend its sovereignty to Gaza thereby ending that perennial problem.
Considering the subsidies that the West provides to UNRWA, Gaza and the PA, this would be a bargain. Given that JOC has tied its fate to Israel, Israel would be happy to contribute to such a solution as the present conflict costs her hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
It really is that simple. There is much more that can be said in support of it.
Prof. Hillel Frisch, a senior research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and Yitzhak Sokoloff, a fellow of the Ingeborg Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies at Bar-Ilan University recently wrote Trump and the Jordanian Option.
The inauguration of an American administration uncommitted to the principle of an independent Palestinian state provides Israel with the opportunity to advocate a long-term strategic vision of building up a prosperous Jordan that could provide an alternative to the model of a two-state solution based on the Palestinian Authority.
They are wrong to suggest that this can be done with King Abdullah. I believe, as does the JOC, that the king is part of the problem and must be replaced by Palestinians.
Gideon Saar, a touted future Prime Minister of Israel, in his recent article, Goodbye Two-State Solution, wrote:
A Jordanian-Palestinian federative solution would offer the Palestinians space in addition to their autonomy. We could also consider adopting a joint Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian economic framework. And there are many other ideas that could be constructed as a result of quiet, serious work with the backing of a supportive US administration.
He is right but the ultimate alternate solution is the one put forward by the JOC.
If anyone wants more information or can help this solution get traction, please write me (tbelman3@gmail.com).
Addendum
David Singer suggested drawing a new border in the Israel Jordan peace agreement. I suggest it should be here.
Shiloh and Beit El must remain in Israel yet they lie east of the new road. In some place the new road can be moved a little to the west if there are significant Arab populations to be included. And look at Ariel. It too must be kept on the Israeli side. A very crooked road. That’s why I came to the conclusion that maybe its better to move them all out.
On second thought I have an alternate suggestion:
Rather than draw a new border, transfer the 1.7 million Arabs in J&S and perhaps 100,000 from Jerusalem to Jordan
But leave the Arabs in Gaza. Israel should put Jordan in power there even if she has to defeat Hamas to do so.
Thus only 1.8 million Arabs from J&S and east Jerusalem would have to move.
One more thing. We could build a highway from Gaza to Jordan . This highway could be open to Egyptian traffic and thus Egypt would finally have a land bridge to Jordan which they want. Jordan would thus gain a port on the Mediterranean.
Your map is absurd!!!
This whole discussion is standing on two flawed premises. First no present Arab society is secular nor democratic. They are Whig and tribal and all opposition in the current Arab World is based on degrees of fundamentalist Islam that is clear about the pettiness of yashmaks and no alcohol and kicking any non -Moslem but has no clue about the practicalities of modern urban industrial economies let alone straight administration.
SECOND as proven since 1948 the Arab simply do not have to sign ie agree and leave the peace or war status in permanent suspension. When Trotsky tried this the Germans just occupied the entire Ukraine and Byelorussia till the Soviets did sign. Pre 1914 anybody essaying this try-on with the Ottomans or the British would have just continued to be pillaged and starved till they gave in qv the Kipling Ballad of East and West. Unfortunately for a variety of Western hypocrisies Israel can not do such a thing for political reasons even though the Arabs massacre each other quite happily without hypocritical disapprovals.
What is needed is to discover or invent means of deporting those with a prison record and their households, and to be ready for the death of Abbas in that whomsoever Israel favours or even appears to will be promptly dubbed a Quisling and assassinated. So favour the nastiest prat. Eventually the oil era will wind down this century and with it the need to act up to the Arabs and friends in UN or elsewhere. Then, or even before given the way the Arab World is tearing itself apart with Iranian help it might suit Jordan to shelter under Israel as in the 70’s and take on areas A and B as demilitarised counties.
Jordan is the Palestinian State – The land originally allocated to the Jewish people,
The British violated the agreement and gave it to the Arabs.
The Jewish people are not only a national and political unit. Since their first appearance on the stage of history they have been the personification of a moral will and the bearers of a historic vision which they inherited from the prophets of Israel. It is impossible to understand the history of the Jewish people and their struggle for existence—both when they were a nation rooted in their own soil and more or less controlling their own destiny, and when they were a wandering people, exiled and dispersed—unless we bear in mind the unique idea which their history embodies, and the stubborn opposition, not only physical, political, and military, but also spiritual, moral, and intellectual, which the Jews have always confronted.
In ancient times, our most important neighbors were Egypt and Babylon. The struggle with these mighty neighbors was political and military as well as cultural and spiritual. Israel’s prophets spoke out against the spiritual influence of these neighbors on Israel’s religio-moral concepts and social patterns. They advocated faith in one God, the unity of the human race, and the dominion of justice. Today, the Jewish people, having held their own, appear again in the same area in which they evolved. The entire environment in this region has been completely transformed since Bible days. The languages, religions, civilizations, and the very names of the ancient Middle Eastern peoples have disappeared. Yet Israel, though largely uprooted for two millenniums, continues its ancient traditions of language, faith, and culture—as it were, uninterruptedly.
YJ Draiman
@ Ted Belman:
I agree with you but how to get rid of them to go to Jordan.
They do not want them.
One problem, the fakestinians are an invented people who are not native to Israel or Jordan. In fact that country is about as much a fiction as they are. Considering the way Jordan handles Jewish holy sites (ie the Temple Mount and Hevron) they are not our ally. In fact we should annex not only Judea, Samaria and Gaza but also every area in Jordan that was part of the United Monarchy (Gilead, Ammon, Moav, and West Edom) as according to Jewish law all land conquered by a King in a war approved by the Sanhedrin is legally part of Eretz Yisrael. In fact we should also parts of Sinai, all of Lebanon (the Phoenicians we supposed to be conquered by the Israelites as they are Caananites so their lands are part of Eretz Yisrael even if we did not conquer all of it), Central Syria and the part of Western Syria bordering Lebanon around Hama, and parts of Turkey. We should a combination of deportation, economic incentives to get rid of the Arabs and Jewish immigration and establish a Jewish majority. That’s the true 1 State Solution!
@ Agnes Forrai:You raise an important point that can’t be emphasized enough. A pro-Pal person I know said that, as a Republican, I should support the Pals, because Republicans support property rights and Israel stole the land. This is prior to 1948 even, he opposed partition! But, virtually all of the land, as you pointed out, was purchased legally by Jews — for well above market prices, and who were, in many cases, subsequently evicted without compensation or just murdered. Over and over, through the centuries. If we are to have any hope of reclaiming the land, we must first make it safe for Arabs to sell land to Jews, because now they know that they will be murdered if they do so. One more reason why the PA and Hamas have to go. Moreover, If Arabs are free to sell their land, it won’t be necessary to subsidize many of them to get them to leave. If Trump dropped the TSS, this would be a no-brainer issue for a nation dedicated to supporting property rights and a free market.
@ Edgar G.:
There is another point which appears to be overlooked by the international community as well as by Israel. This is the 2013 ruling of of the Court of Appeals of Versailles. This INDEPENDENT, not an Israeli court, ruled that only Israel had legal rights to Judea and Samaria, including Jerusalem . The Arabs Have non. Whilst the decision pertained to a suit brought by the PA, over the construction of a light rail in Jerusalem, the ruling has far reaching ramifications, because in reaching their decision the court needed to use international law to establish the legal rights of the Arabs (aka palestinians) and Israel, to the area aka as “West Bank”. The PA was ordered to pa 90000 euros.link: @Jean-Patrick Grumberg for http://www.Dreuz.info
With regard to the Golan Heights: in 1890s Baron Rothchild bought 20000 acres of Syrian land from the Ottoman Empire. In 1942 Syria illegaly confiscated that land. No compensation. In 1957 the Baron transferred the deeds to JNF and in 1992 the Deeds were moved to the PM’s office where they still reside. http://www.truthinmedia.org I suspect that it is these landsof the Golan which Israel liberated.
Keep talking and invent all kinds of scenarii I still maintain that besides perhaps short living temporary half baked political acrobatics real, durable peace remains impossible to achieve. The Arab-Muslim and Islam will never come to terms with the existence of a Jewish state in what they consider their territory. And certainly not now, when they think history is again on their side, that the time has come to push for a world Caliphate and enjoy already some successes in the western world. Please, somebody tell me I am mistaken!
Upon further consideration, I withdraw my earlier objections. Even if the PLO took over in Jordan, they would be no match for Israel and who cares if they hate us as long as they are over there and not in Israel. The important thing is to pull the rug out from under the TSS and retain Jewish sovereignty, in principle, over all of Judea and Samaria. This plan accomplishes that. So do others, Feiglin, Bennett, Glick, Plaut, piecemeal annexation such as starting with the big blocs like Maale Adumim. These are all better than the TSS.
Exchanging territory, as some, like Lieberman, have suggested, is not only wrong but impractical. Arabs would just illegally move to the Israeli side, creating the same problem in a smaller Israel. Most of them came illegally during the Mandate period from the Arab countries that had been set aside for them. There is little will to deport illegals in Israel any more than here in the U.S. and Europe. Without that, any talk of changing borders is merely about shrinking the range in which the IDF and Shin Bet can operate. Suicidal, in practice.
But, the elephant in the room is that the PA and Hamas must be dismantled. Terror has to be organized. Even lone wolf terror is encouraged from the center. In refusing to engage in war to the finish earlier rather than later, many more lives will be lost in the long run. On the other hand, there is the common front being formed against Isis and Iran. Even if such a war did not influence the other states in the coalition, it could weaken Israel by creating another front. Or, it could strengthen it, if it was accomplished quickly enough and the Arab population fled, was deported or brought under control. But, the rules of engagement would probably have to be loosened. It’s harder to win, when your troops have one hand tied behind their backs. That’s something that Trump understands. He recently took steps to loosen them for U.S. special forces leading the fight against Isis in coalition with Kurdish forces. The article didn’t specify how or how much.
This plan really is the 2nd TSS. There have been so many. When liberals say they support the TSS, I like to confuse them by saying, “Which one?” The first was: the Jews get Palestine, the Arabs get the rest. The second was, “Palestine minus Jordan.” I’d love to kick them out of Jordan too but this would certainly be an improvement!
Dear Sit, let’s be realistic, the ” Jordan – Palestine ” option is a non starter , because Jordan is a very weal political-economical structure ; On the opposite side of the Med.sea , you have states which are litterally craving for more islamic immigrants : Germany – France – Belgium – Spain
Germany the ruler of the IVth reich has room for cheap immigrant labor force all over her empire which spans from the Baltci sea to the mouth of Danube in Romania; ther you have thousands of square miles of agricultural lands empty-left over – abandonned , the central europe peasantry has vanished, those hungarians-romanians-poles-slovakians want to sit in their capital in front of a HD monitor to speak in english with a remote customer over the big pond ; the central europe has turned into a post-modern , post industrial space which can only delivers cheap services . 2 millions palesti-nope can be settled there with great easiness , and they will be happy with their new life ; rivers-trees – forest – huge graze pastures – cattle to take care – they will be at the immediate contact of old europe..etc. The same apply in france-Belgium for different reasons , here the palesti-nopes are welcome because the elites ( left-post-modern so called ” socialistes ” ) need some guardians of their post-modern economic order to keep in check the rebellious ” gaulois-gallic ” , who are tilting towards the extreme-right of Ms Le Pen. It’s a matter of arithmetic demography; the socialist elites want to crush the middle class and rob their wallets, so they have to import millions of muslims immigrants to counterbalance the gallic middle class . france now counts twelve millions muslims , half imported since the ludicrous 1977 law opening borders to ” reunion familiale ” ( union of kinship with foreign residents extends up to the seventh grade of kinship in french civil law ) . Anotehr million palesti-nopes are welcome in France to keep the demographic-electoral balance in favour of the socialists ( all residing in the Posh districts of course ). Same story in Belgium . So let’s enlarge the problem to the very core of europe which must ounce fro all admit its guiltiness in 15 centuries of violence against the jewish people . THis is the true repairment of europe torts . Let’s do it .
This article published a month ago has drawn a lot of attention. Most articles I post get about 300 to 400 readers. Some get 1000. But this article is already up to 4,200 without being pushed for the last month. And that is beside the traffic it had at American Thinker and Canada Free Press and Israel National News.
Sherman’s plan and Feiglin’s plan were both posted on Israpundit and perhaps attracted 500 each. I believe mine did better because it outlined a plan that was within reach.
When I first wrote the article I suggested that we could move Gazans out of Gaza and then annex it. It also suggested that we could leave the Arabs in the major population centers in J&S in place. When I realized that That would mean that 800,000 had to be moved, I thought it would be a shame that we would complicate our hold on J&S by encircling the remaining 800,000. I thought we may as well go for broke and try to get them all to leave,
Then I made this easier by saying that the Gazans could stay and Jordan could annex it.
Bottom line is that I didn’t want to sign on to specific borders. I preferred to present some alternatives.
@ Edgar G.:
Not sure why you have got your knickers in such a knot. I haven’t posted any comment to this site for one month.
Your claim that “What you seem to be doing, to my untutored eyes, is to push Ted into making a new boundary to YOUR liking, and which he incautiously talked about a hundred or two posts back” is therefore totally unjustified.
If Ted doesn’t want to improve on his first draft so be it. I have given him up as a lost cause as he is obviously disinterested in going further.
While I am replying to you – your claim “We must have ALL the Arabs out of Israel, especially YESHA and even GAZA,” is nonsensical and is certainly never going to occur without a catastrophic war.
I believe that a resolution of the Jewish-Arab conflict can be achieved without one Jew or Arab leaving his current home by the expedient of drawing a new international border between Israel and Jordan.
That is why I was keen to see if Ted was prepared to draw up a new map to show if this is a possibility that can actually occur.
Ted opted out of doing so with this comment:
“Rather than draw a new border, transfer the 1.7 million Arabs in J&S and perhaps 100,000 from Jerusalem to Jordan”
He is silent on how this can be achieved – as you are with your even more grandiose plan of transfer.
@ Abolish_public_education:
xx
In this I am absolutely, hands-down in agreement with you. $300.000 to an Arab to move from OUR Land is an obscene outrage, that it is even suggested by these egg-heads who are so keen on giving away the money belonging to other people, and which can be used for a far nobler cause.
Moving to Jordan….give them $5000 each, and that’s a lot to move practically nothing, just a few miles. Let the Arabs take care of their own. From living for years in Israel, and building there, I KNOW that where Arab builders working for Jewish companies, will take 2-3 years to build a Jewish house, they can build the same house for themselves or their families withing a couple of months MAXIMUM. They get their cousins and brothers, and don’t deliberately slack on the job like they do with Jews. And it costs them basically peanuts, a tiny fraction of what it costs when they work for a Jewish contractor.
I would only give them Bupkes mit Kaduchas with pleasure. and even wave goodbye.
Right-wing Big Government.
Outrageous.
If this policy were to be adopted, incredibly, then in all fairness Jewish-Israeli taxpayers living in Israel should be offered financial incentives to leave.
To NY, LA, Buenos Aires. Wherever.
$300K per family sounds about right.
@ david singer:
xx
What you seem to be doing, to my untutored eyes, is to push Ted into making a new boundary to YOUR liking, and which he incautiously talked about a hundred or two posts back. He has been evading the issue now ever since, although you have been pushing him. You should have noticed it long ago not being-I suppose- more than ordinarily obtuse.
We must have ALL the Arabs out of Israel, especially YESHA and even GAZA, because wherever they squat in a permanent style, becomes Arab territory and defeats the ages old intent of the return of the Jewish People to Eretz Yisrael, which has been, in modern days, endorsed by the Community of modern nations, and ratified by Presidents and Governments with NO exceptions.
STOP THE MODERATION NONSENSE…..!!!!!xyz and abc et al.
I am 100% okay with that column except about the line “1.75 million Palestinians live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank). The 800,000 Arabs in Hebron, Nablus, Ramallah, and Bethlehem could remain there as Jorandian citizens.” because it will mean we give lands of Judea & Samaria to Jordan, validating its 1948 conquest on the land of Israel !
That is really a pity because that comulmn was almost perfect.
https://jsuisjreste.wordpress.com
Ted
Here is the link to 2008 Map which all your readers can view.
http://www.jpost.com/HttpHandlers/ShowImage.ashx?ID=219296
Ted
The point I was trying to make is that a new international border between Israel and Jordan must surely be feasible without 800000 Arabs living on the Israeli side of the new border.
I came across the following article which contains a map supposedly suggested by Olmert during the 2008 negotiations in which Israel wanted to keep 6.3% of Judea and Samaria in exchange for 5.8% of Israel’s sovereign territory.
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Details-of-Olmerts-peace-offer-to-Palestinians-exposed-314261
Maybe you can use that map as the basis for establishing where the new international boundary between Israel and Jordan could be located.
I doubt any land swap would be on the table given the changed security situation since 2008 and there might be more than 6.3% of J and S to be retained by Israel.
Are you prepared to have a go at Draft 2?
david singer Said:
If Israel released 95% of the territories there would not be 800,000 Arabs remaining in the 5%. I never said what you wrote.
A One State Solution is the only viable alternative and it will have to come unilaterally. If the Arabs ( I refuse to call them Palestinians because that sounds to Western ears as if they are a tribe with actual ties to the land) had truly been looking for negotiated answers they would have agreed to a political solution decades ago. The only solution they want is Jewish genocide.
So the One State Solution must come by force and since Islam is and will forever be at war with Judaism, the Arabs must be removed from the land of Israel. I wouldn’t pay them a dime for what they have stolen all these years. Tremendous economic incentive could be put out to Jordan as new economic force with close economic ties to Israel. But ultimately I dont car to which Arab country Arabs goes…that is an Arab problem. Peace within Israel’s borders will only come when the Muslims area all out. Israel will still have plenty to worry about just protecting borders from the Islamists who will forever salivate at the thought of killing a Jew. May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the God of Israel, bless Israel.
Never feed your enemy. These plans all envision transfers of money to Arabs. Just develop the Israeli economy, and inflation, so that it is simply uneconomical for Arabs to remain West of the Jordan River, i.e cost of decent housing, living expenses, taxes, etc. Even Arabs are not interested in a lower standard of living to live like the Bedouin. Self-deportation is what needs to be advanced.
@ Sebastien Zorn:
@ Edgar G.:
@ Bear Klein:
And the Lakota Sioux still lay claim to the Black Hills of S.Dak. The Mexicans lay claim to Texas south of Nueces River, Treaties are worthless.
@ Edgar G.:
CHAPTER XII: INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEESHIP SYSTEM is were article 80 is found and they are referencing the mandates involved.
Explanation of applicability below in the link.
https://www.algemeiner.com/2011/09/22/article-80-and-the-un-recognition-of-a-%E2%80%9Cpalestinian-state%E2%80%9D/
@ Sebastien Zorn:
xxx
The Treaty of Sevres cut up the Ottoman Empire-destroyed it as an entity..
and basically along the lines of the San Remo…. It”failed” only because it was rejected by an Opposition Nationalist Government in Turkey which was in a political ferment, but…Turkey had LOST the war and was in no position to object. The Treaty of Lausanne, (the result of some local Turkish Nationalist victories) officially ended the state of war between the powers and regained a small but significant part of the former Empire stripped by Sevres. It restored national “pride”
All the above conferences including the LoN Britsh Mandate for Palestine, although held separately, were all part and parcel of the post-war “new look of the scenery…. looked at from nearly 100 years later-like now- it seemed to have become a sort of package deal.
As a result of much reading on the subject(s) this is the way I see it, and I believe I’ve come to the correct conclusion.
P.S. For example, ALTHOUGH IT MAY BE THERE (as I cannot recall if I read Art. 80 completely), I have not seen the Balfour Letter, nor The San Remo Conference decisions awarding Palestine to The Jewish People in Article 80 of the UN Charter, which we quote frequently as a valid proof of the right of the Jewish People to the whole Land between the Jordan River and the Sea.
I would be happy, if wrong, to be corrected on this latter point.
@ Bear Klein:
Everyone seems to forget or overlook the 2013 ruling of the independent French Court of Appeal of Versailles. This independent, not Israeli, court ruled that Israel and only Israel has Legal Rights to all of Judea and Samaria. Although the suit brought by the PA was about a rail line, the ruling has greater, far reaching implications.
@ Bear Klein:
I think you will not find Trump trying to force things down Israels throat like Obama.
This give away parts of Israel to Jordan ideas are basically are void of reality. The issue is not where the border is but the existence of the state of Israel. That is the root of the problem.
Why do people believe they have the right to give away the Land of Israel? Correct answer is you do not! You want to send Palestinians to Jordan be my guest.
@ Ted Belman:
Ted
The 3D illustration could be a handy reference tool on which you could prepare Draft 2
Transferring 1.8 million Arabs from J and S is not a realistic option. My proposal calls for the great majority of those 1.8 million to remain living where they are now within the expanded area of Jordan
There seems to be something very wrong with your comment.
When Israel proposed conceding about 95% of Judea and Samaria in 2008, it seems inconceivable that 800000 West Bank Arabs would still remain in the area of J and S to be retained by Israel.
I am no expert on Google Earth but perhaps you might know someone who can use Google Earth to draw us a proposed new international border between Israel and Jordan.
@ Edgar G.:
I can’t find where the Treaty of Sevres talks about Palestine and I read that the Treaty of Lausanne superceded the Treaty of Sevres in 1923. Again, no mention of Palestine in what I read. More on that?
xxx
Another overlooked point…..in my opinion.. There are innumerable references to “disputed” and “disputed lands” etc. As far as I can find a definition of a dispute, It requires that 2 people/sides/countries, dispute the dispute so to speak.
In this matter of the Land of Israel, there is only ONE disputant, the Arab interloper squatters. Israel is not disputing because the Land immutably belongs to The Jewish People, by history, and the legal International agreements after WW1. They were, The San Remo Conference, the Treaty of Sevres, the League of Nations British Mandate for Palestine, The Anglo American Treaty, and the U.N. Founding Charter Art. 80. All valid to this day.
This should make it quite clear that the Land is not being “disputed” it’s an attempt to steal it from it’s righful, legal owners, Israel being curiously passive about it.
I’ve asked this before but never got an answer….”Is there some fatal flaw in those agreements and treaties above quoted, which make Israel stop short of using them to show ownership…? Or is it that Israel is quite content that the PA be supported, because poorly as they do it, they keep some sort of order in YESHA, which saves Israel from the trouble.
If the latter is the case, I think it’s a poor exchange, because it has allowed terrorism to become a fact of daily life in Israel, which would NEVER be tolerated for a moment by any of it’s present-day critics.
My plan is a fantasy plan.
In reality ever since Israel won the ’67 War, the US have been currying favour with the Arabs by forcing Israel to give them the territories that Israel “liberated in the war.
Even Donald Trump is trying to appease the Arabs by bringing them into the discussion and seeking an agreement with them. He also wants to center discussions around the Arab Peace Initiatives.
My plan could become reality only if Trump says this is what we are going to do. Live with it.
david singer Said:
Yes, that’s correct. By the way the 800,000 is a guestimate only. As you know 95% of the Arabs live in A and B. So I just split the number between east of the new border and west of the new border.
david singer Said:
That would be great except it would come at the expense of security. Israel must retain the high ground. That should not be compromised.
I posted another image at the end of the article which shows the demography and commented;
xxx
TED,, one thing I’ve ALWAYS forgotten to mention, although I knew it well, was that on the agreement that Weitzman and Feisal made, Feisal wrote in the margin(or below I can’t recall) that the agreement would only stand if all the agreement had been kept…. e
Now I’m sure that some was not kept but the whole thing was taken over by Britain, which misused it’s Mandate so the Jews were never in the position of being able to carry out the agreement.. The Agency, although strong and influential, could not overcome the huge error made by Samuel in appointing Amin El Husseini as the Mufti, who immediately used his position to wreck everything. I seem to recall that Plumer was the best of the administrators; who kept good control over the Arabs, but could not control more than the actual violence at the societal level. It’s very many years since I read up on it so I may be a little out here and there.
I also have Samuel’s autobiography where, altough he was well meaning, he is quite self serving, and defensive.
@ Ted Belman:
Ted
I am a little confused by your response and seek the following clarifications:
1. Let’s talk about Judea and Samaria first.
2. You state:
“The present border I drew just west of the Arab cities would necessitate 800,000 Palestinians from J&S to be transferred to Jordan of course with compensation.”
I take this to mean that your new border would see 800000 Arabs in J and S living on the Israel side of that new border and that you want those 800000 Arabs transferred to the Jordan side of the new border with compensation.
Please confirm this is correct.
If correct – how many Jews would remain on the Jordan side of the new border?
3. If my conclusions in 2 are correct – then the new border you have prepared (Draft 1) needs to be redrawn so as to include as few Arabs as possible on the Israel side and as few Jews as possible on the Jordan side.(“the identified affected populations”) whilst also accommodating Israel’s security concerns.
The new border need not be a straight line. It can twist and turn around towns and villages as do so many international borders around the world.
When you have prepared the new border (Draft 2) we can then discuss what is to happen to the identified affected populations.
Perhaps everyone else contributing to this discussion could also come up with their own versions of how the new international border would look – providing us all with their proposed maps their estimates of the identified affected populations.
Let us then agree on the best map and then go on to discuss how to deal with the identified affected populations.
This seems to me a far more worthwhile exercise of ourcollective time than engaging in lengthy comments that really end up going nowhere in trying to resolve a conflict that has now been ongoing for 100 years.
It is in a .pdf of 60 pages
https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=824100098007120005107024078029006090038051063013063017078065110109100087112123093065039020017097126100053083023064025064066073045032091044031109081024123126026119021002039026018122094064080000112122067127065109102121025069087070001122097090017093110&EXT=pdf
Israel has historical and moral rights to Judea/Samaria. Modern Legal Rights in part stem from the San Remo treaty and the Palestinian Manadate.
If one wishes to learn about the legality of Israeli settlements in Judea/ Samaria click on the following: http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/03/the-legal-case-for-israels-settlements/
@ david singer:
https://unitedwithisrael.org/analysis-setting-the-record-straight-on-israels-rights-in-judea-and-samaria-under-international-law/
@ david singer:
I have not worked on it. The present border I drew just west of the Arab cities would necessitate 800,000 Palestinians from J&S to be transferred to Jordan of course with compensation.Although I didn’t show it on the map, we could retain the Jordan Valley except for Jericho.
So in my scenario we are also transferring 1.7 million Gazans to Jordan. In total 2.5 to Jordan with 800,000 to remain. With those numbers we may as well transfer them all.
But if Gaza can be conquered by Israel, she can install Jordan in power there and that means that 1.7 Gazans don’t have to be transferred. Thus only 1.7 from J&S would have to move.
One more thing. We could build a highway from Gaza to Jordan just south of the border between Israel and Eqypt. This highway would thus be in Eqypt and Egypt would also benefit from it and finally have a land bridge to Jordan which they want. And Jordan would have a port on the Mediterranean.
So I prefer this to keeping the Arab cities where they are but part of Jordan.
I have not followed the discussion in the last 50 comments or more. I intend to read them all and follow the debate.
I do want to say one thing now. I prefaced the post on Trump not wanting to criticise Israel.
I prefer Jordan as a partner to talks instead of the PA because they have so much land and we are so short of it. If Abdullah is willing to take the Palestinians in, in exchange for money, let’s talk. If not Trump should pressure him to do so. He should be given the choice to do so or to abdicate. One option is to have his Palestinian wife replace him as the monarch.
He can always be replaced by the JOC. And I believe that with US and Israel support we can keep him in power just as we kept Abbas in power.
Ted
How are you going with preparing draft 2 of the proposed new international border between Israel and Jordan?
You state:
“Anything west of the Jordan River we have the right to apply Israeli Civil Law if we so deem in our best interests.”
What “right” are you referring to?
@ Sebastien Zorn:
I am your humble acolyte.
@ david singer:
Correct me if I am wrong but it appears pride of authorship has gotten laser focused on this Jordanian option.
Israel (Moshe Dayan) made a huge mistake in getting Jordan involved in the running the Muslim institutions on the Temple Mount. This is a major problem. Israel does not need to get the Jordanians involved in Judea/Samaria. If they want to take those with Jordanian citizenship into Jordan fine. Anything west of the Jordan River we have the right to apply Israeli Civil Law if we so deem in our best interests.
If we mix the Jordanians into our affairs it will completely backfire and make a complicated situation even worse. They have enough trouble trying to keep Jordan from exploding and unable to do anything more.
You have a bad idea! It is will not help.
@ bernard ross:
You omit to mention that Israel and the PLO were the only parties to the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap.
Jordan – occupying 78% of the territory designated in the Mandate and having occupied another 4% between 1948 to 1967 – was conveniently left out of solving a problem it had materially helped to create.
Now is the time for Jordan to come to the party.
Bernard
The Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty states:
“3.1 The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
3.2 The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.”
The status of those territories still remains undetermined. My suggestion is that Israel and Jordan determine such status within the framework of their existing signed peace treaty by redrawing the international boundary between their respective States in direct negotiations.
If Jordan rejects that invitation or such negotiations end up going nowhere like those with the PLO over the last 23 years – then it will fall to Israel to unilaterally determine that status.
@ honeybee:
Good girl.
david singer Said:
No one placed that responsibility on Israel. Israel took it in war
and the world wants them to give it up. You appear completely ignorant of pertinent facts and history which might explain absurd statements such as this one.
david singer Said:
No need for a 3rd Arab state on the mandate territory of the Jewish homeland, they were NOT trying to “establish a second Arab state” just trying to establish non belligerence with neighbors which they have accomplished with some success with Egypt and Jordan.
david singer Said:
ragtag compared to the army of Egypt, Jordan and Hezbullah; I refer to the PA who would become as hamastan if given the same or more sovereignty. Also, Hamastan is only limited in threat by the exercise of limiting their sovereignty. If they were a fully free recognized state they would not be limited in threat.
david singer Said:
Absurd rubbish as already explained,there is no upside to Jordan being legally able to maintain troops and weaponry west of the river with new land and borders and there is no reason for you to seek such a dangerous scenario which increases military threat to Israe!. You have stated no factual based argument for adding a new threat which Israel drove out in war.
david singer Said:
The constitution of Jordan is irrelevant AND the west bank was neither part of the original Brit fraudulent creation NOR was their occupancy recognized by any nation other than Pakistan and the swindling trustee perfidious Albion
Try to internalize the fact that Jordan and Israel negotiated and agreed their borders over 20 years ago PLUS giving the PA an uncontrolled physical link to Jordan has been tried and failed with Gaza, a huuuuge mistake which completely relies now on the leader of any day in Egypt, a huge mistake.
Bear Klein Said:
I don’t wish to grammar maven, as are some on this blog, but please re-read the above sentence.