Exhibit number one for failed negotiations, demonization of the opponent, lack of understand of their position.
May I respectfully refer you to my post and in particular to the issue of (a) Jewish colonization/settlement of the occupied territories, including expropriation of lands Palestinians consider their own (b) lack of application by Israel, for a variety of reasons both domestic and international, of the Oslo accords.
“Attempts to reason with the Arabs” is simply the language of jingoism.
The issue remains one of a problem of compromises. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians have arived at mutually acceptable compromises, not because they are “impossible” but because each side keeps trying to play from power. Israel negotiated Oslo, but continued a policy of settlement rather clearly against the very text negotiated. It has reasons to do so, but the issue of settlement, alhtough with non-application of the accords, quite clearly helped scuttle negotations. On the other side, the Palestinians have rather loudly focused on their rights without truly fully acknowledging Israeli rights/concerns. Moreover in re the “right of return” – which is a legal right of the refugees but one quite impossible for Israel to admit for the obvious demographic and practical reasons, they have staked out an excessive position and largely seem to exclude compromise. On the other hand, Israel simply ignores this issue in re offering its own solutions, e.g. compensation funds.
A negative and mutual feedback loop: being uncomfortably close to the issue and hearing both sides, I feel quite confident in advancing the opinion both sides have equally scuttled peace.
No, that is false. Jordan and Egypt quite clearly would prefer normal if somewhat cold relations with Israel. Do they like it that Israel exists? No. Do they accept its existance? Yes, you don’t see “zionist entity” references anymore, and with the exception of the extremists, most references and discussion, in Arabic, take for granted Israel’s existance.
Now in re the Palestinians, I think there is some ambivalance, however, at the same time it again seems clear that the consciousness is there that they’re not going to get 1948 lands back, and most of the discourse I have seen, read lately focuses on the occupied territories and issues of expropriation of land. And I believe they have a point, alhtough I also understand where Israeli policy is coming from. However, it is at direct contradiction with a lasting peace.
Syria… who knows what Syria is truly doing. Largely Syria has a big mouth and wants Golan back. After? Lebanon. Lebanon is a Syrian puppet in this matter, but largely wants, it seems to me, to stay out of Israeli affairs. The Hezbollah militia has a hard-on for the whatsamacallit farms region, but that seems to have died down. Otherwise, to my understanding, with some exceptions the Lebanon border is fairly quiet.
Of that’s productive, lay waste to the aggressor nations! Why that will just win Israel the accolades of the world and advance the cause of a normalized Israel.
Give me a break: there is no open war now, and Israeli pre-emptive attacks on its neighbors would simply drive them into rejection of its existance again. Frankly, this suggestion is unhelpful and stupid.
How about us rational people with an understanding of the region? I utterly reject this characterization for the reasons already stated above. This is not 1967 or 1973. The region has changed since then, as has the Arab position, collectively.
The terms, to be frank, were not reasonable (contra Edwino’s argument, which at least is reasonable) nor could he accept them given the populace would not accept them. A review of the snipped up territory the latest package would have given the Paletinians in comparision with Oslo (true now quite dead) reveals more on the matter. The Israelis certainly had valid reasons of state for trying this, but the Palestinians had valid reasons to reject (see settlements once more). Further, the issue of Jerusalem is non-trivial. Frankly there will have to be further compromise all-around, above all re the holy sites.
Rubbish. Utter rubbish.
Rubbish, Arafat, the little moron, would like nothing more than to enjoy the trappings of a pseudo-state. Given his druthers, it seems clear that he might have actually gone for the agreements proferred. The street is where the real rejection came from.
I roll me eyes.