Is It Time for Israel to Annex Some West Bank Territory? — Judith Levy

 

As you’ve probably read, John Kerry has stated outright that it’s Israel’s fault that the so-called peace process ran aground, though State is frantically backpedalling. (See John Podhoretz’s column in the New York Post for a pithy response to the “deceitful, pompous, self-righteous and vindictive fool”.) Rather than rehash the failure of the talks, let’s take a look at a proposed new way forward.

Member of Knesset Naftali Bennett is the leader of Bayit Hayehudi (The Jewish Home), a right-wing party that secured 12 seats in the last election. Bennett has taken the occasion of the most recent failure of negotiations to reassert one of the platforms on which he ran his campaign: that Israel should unilaterally annex a sizeable chunk of the West Bank:

All 350,000 of the Jews in Judea and Samaria live in Area C, some 60% of the area. Of the Palestinians in the West Bank, 97% live in Area A, which is under full Palestinian control, and Area B, which is under Palestinian civil control and Israeli military control.

“It is clear that the diplomatic process has run its course and that we are entering a new era,” Bennett wrote Netanyahu. “We have been hitting our heads against the wall of negotiations over and over again for years and we kept getting surprised when the wall did not break. The time has come for new thinking.”

Bennett launched a public relations initiative Wednesday for his “Settlement Blocs First” plan, which calls for annexing blocs such as Ariel, Gush Etzion, Ma’aleh Adumim, Beit El-Ofra and communities that overlook Ben-Gurion Airport. He explained his plan on CNN Wednesday night and intends to push it to the international community.

Bennett is controversial — he has been criticized for saying, among other things, that Arab terrorists should be shot — but his stance on annexation, which was once a fringe position, now resonates for more Israelis than it used to. One does not need to live in the settlements, or even to sympathize particularly with those who do, to have lost patience with a Palestinian leadership that no longer even troubles to conceal its bad faith, and which seems to have as much contempt for its American cheerleaders and the sympathetic Israeli left as it does for Israelis like Bennett.

Annexation would be a bold move, to say the least, but there is a certain bravura appeal in the disregard it displays for world opinion. And Bennett’s timing makes sense: Kerry’s “the Israelis blew it” position demonstrates yet again the inevitability that Israel will be blamed for the failure of peace negotiations, no matter what shticklach the other side pulls:

A Hebrew video with subtitles in multiple languages that the Jerusalem and Diaspora affairs minister released explained why the plan could be practical. It says that the international community does not recognize Israel’s annexation of eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, so annexing part of the West Bank would just add another thing for the world to complain about.

The three-staged plan starts with annexing Area C and offering citizenship to its Palestinians.

It calls for giving the Palestinians upgraded autonomy in Areas A and B. The third stage is massive investment in Palestinian areas to improve their quality of life and improve their lives.

“We should be taking a bottom- up strategy rather than creating an artificial state in the heart of Israel,” a source close to Bennett said.

Now this might, of course, prove hopeless: for all the plan’s bracing practicality and neat handling of the demographic problem, it’s not necessarily in Israel’s best interest to entrench her position as pariah state even more solidly than it is already. We’ll see how far this goes.

Still, the landscape is not quite the same as it was before the most recent collapse of the talks. Abbas’s position in particular grows ever more tenuous. Israel is said to be turning her attention away from him and toward his bitter rival Mohammad Dahlan, and to be “seeking rapprochement with Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt in its attempts to make Dahlan the point person for any future dialogue with the Palestinian Authority.” According to the Jerusalem Post, this prospect makes the Americans very uncomfortable, because “the aforementioned Arab states are currently in conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood – and involving these parties in negotiations would incorporate Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, into the greater regional conflict.”

It would likely come as a surprise to Hamas to learn that it is not already incorporated into the greater regional conflict. One would have thought greater leverage against the Gazan thugocracy was a good thing, not a bad thing, when permanent status negotiations are in process. That’s not how they see it at State, but anxious sound bytes emanating from Foggy Bottom don’t emanate quite as far as they used to. Of course, that might have been President Obama’s goal all along, in which case, mission accomplished.

Never a dull moment. Stay tuned.

Image of sign marking entrance to Area A — “Entrance to Israeli Citizens Is Forbidden” — via Huffington Post.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 70 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Israel P. Inactive
    Israel P.
    @IsraelP

    Talks have collapsed before and the notion of applying Israeli law in Judea and Samaria has never gotten very far.

    So why is this collapse different from all other collapses?

    In all other collapses, there has been lip service to the necessity to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. In this collapse, John Kerry.

    In all other collapses, there were serious people, even if they were wrong. In this collapse, Joe Biden.

    In all other collapses, what difference would it make. In this collapse, Hillary Clinton – and don’t let anyone forget it!

    In all other collapses, the US has always known who the good guy is. In this collapse, Barack Obama.

    • #1
  2. The Mugwump Inactive
    The Mugwump
    @TheMugwump

    The preexisting position of the left is that the West is always guilty.  By extension we are expected to believe that the “other” is always the victim.  What Kerry and his ilk fail to appreciate is the mindset that sees this battle as a conflict between civilization and savagery.  Mr. Netanyahu is clear-eyed in his understanding whereas the left sides with barbarism as a means to assuage their collective guilt.  It would never occur to leftist thinkers that the guilt is entirely phony and contrived.  Ironic, too, that the side most likely to scream “hater” has never denounced Yasser Arafat.  His legacy leaves his people poisoned to this day.  Kerry is the type of fool who would put his bear foot in a viper’s nest in the belief that his good intentions will protect him.  The rest of us carry a stick in the knowledge that a viper will remain true to its nature.

    • #2
  3. Manfred Arcane Inactive
    Manfred Arcane
    @ManfredArcane

    There is so much background knowledge needed to process this (interesting) post.

    For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful.

    Additional Questions:

    What does “upgraded autonomy” mean?

    What form of ‘massive investment in Palestinian areas to improve their quality of life and improve their lives’ is meant here?

    Why is this true, “Abbas’s position in particular grows ever more tenuous”, and why switch to his bitter rival?  To what purpose?

    How does one do this, “seeking rapprochement with Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt in its attempts to make Dahlan the point person for any future dialogue with the Palestinian Authority.”? What is the interest of these other parties to offer a rapprochement?

    Why would the following occur: “”the aforementioned Arab states are currently in conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood – and involving these parties in negotiations would incorporate Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, into the greater regional conflict.”  What impels the involvement of the MB?

    Thanks.

    • #3
  4. Israel P. Inactive
    Israel P.
    @IsraelP

    Manfred Arcane: For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful.

     Not as helpful as you would think, without the topography.

    • #4
  5. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Manfred Arcane:For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful.

     It looks like a done deal, pretty much (according to Btselem) – but there’s a map showing Area C in the article.  From which:

    Increasingly, we are hearing educated observers say out loud what many of us have long suspected: Israel has successfully annexed most of the territory long considered to be the heart of an eventual Palestinian state.

    • #5
  6. Kay of MT Inactive
    Kay of MT
    @KayofMT

    This has all been thoroughly discussed in Caroline Glick’s new book, “The Israel Solution,” her speeches, her video’s and on her web page. She has all the demographics and maps. She PROVES that Israel has legal rights of sovereign to Judea and Samaria by international law, thoroughly proven in Chapter 12 of her book. The Israelis have been fighting terrorism since 1920 and won the war when the Arabs tried to destroy her in 1948.  Everybody seems to forget that at the time Palistine was established and divided between the Jews and Jordan, so was Lebanon; Syria; Iraq; and the world seems to have no problems accepting them as legitimate countries. All those countries except Israel, slaughter each other by the thousands. Syria in the last couple of years has more than 100,000 of her people killed. Who takes in the Syrian wounded? Israel.

    Who has a democratic government? Who allows all religions to live in peace with each other? Who protects the sacred sites to all religions in Israel?

    Serah Honig has also thoroughly discussed Israel’s legal right to the “occupied by the Arab terrorists,” territory.  For 70 years the Islamist refuse to even try to make peace with Israel, and refuse her right to even have a single Jew live there.

    Please stop with the continuing referrals as the “settlements is occupied” as a negative because Jews in those areas have as much rights to build housing as I do in Montana.The situation is far too complicated to cover in a short article with comments by people who only get their news and information from newspapers and anti-Israel blogs and commentaries.

    • #6
  7. Group Captain Mandrake Inactive
    Group Captain Mandrake
    @GroupCaptainMandrake

    Zafar:

    Manfred Arcane:For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful.

    It looks like a done deal, pretty much (according to Btselem) – but there’s a map showing Area C in the article. From which:

    Increasingly, we are hearing educated observers say out loud what many of us have long suspected: Israel has successfully annexed most of the territory long considered to be the heart of an eventual Palestinian state.

     Sorry, I have concerns about the accuracy of B’Tselem‘s reports.  I don’t believe it is a done deal or even that the idea will necessarily make progress.  I would add, however, that the one thing I learned from reading “Like Dreamers” is that the idea of annexation began to resonate with many Israelis quite a few years ago.

    • #7
  8. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Group Captain Mandrake:

    Zafar:

    Manfred Arcane:For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful. 

    It looks like a done deal, pretty much (according to Btselem) – but there’s a map showing Area C in the article. From which:

    Increasingly, we are hearing educated observers say out loud what many of us have long suspected: Israel has successfully annexed most of the territory long considered to be the heart of an eventual Palestinian state. 

    Sorry, I have concerns about the accuracy of B’Tselem‘s reports. I don’t believe it is a done deal or even that the idea will necessarily make progress. I would add, however, that the one thing I learned from reading “Like Dreamers” is that the idea of annexation began to resonate with many Israelis quite a few years ago.

    Probably in 1967, for some. 

    (I know you don’t like B’Tselem, but what in their report was incorrect?  The map? The restrictions on Palestinian activities in Area C?  Israeli investment and settlement in Area C?  If none of it was wrong, whether we like B’Tselem or not is not really relevant to their point, is it?  Re ‘done deal’ – here’s an Australian program with Daniela Weiss on the subject. I guess she might be wrong.)

    • #8
  9. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    It appears to me that international law, when it comes to seizing territory means nothing. That has been proven again with Russia. In fact, it appears that any nation can make it stick if they just don’t care about the rest of the world and no one else is willing to use force to stop them.

    Israel is hated because Jews are hated world wide. I am not sure why they are, but they are. China does things bad, but we still do business with them. Israel will never get international support or be seen as a moral nation.

    It should do whatever it takes to be secure. Personally, I’d end the problem by pushing the “refugees” into the arms of their Arab Brothers in Egypt. But the people of Israel are nicer than I am.

    • #9
  10. Group Captain Mandrake Inactive
    Group Captain Mandrake
    @GroupCaptainMandrake

    Zafar:

    Group Captain Mandrake:

    Zafar:

    Manfred Arcane:For instance, a map of areas A, B and C would be helpful. 

    It looks like a done deal, pretty much (according to Btselem) – but there’s a map showing Area C in the article. From which:

    Increasingly, we are hearing educated observers say out loud what many of us have long suspected: Israel has successfully annexed most of the territory long considered to be the heart of an eventual Palestinian state. 

    Sorry, I have concerns about the accuracy of B’Tselem‘s reports. I don’t believe it is a done deal or even that the idea will necessarily make progress. I would add, however, that the one thing I learned from reading “Like Dreamers” is that the idea of annexation began to resonate with many Israelis quite a few years ago.

    Probably in 1967, for some.(I know you don’t like B’Tselem, but what in their report was incorrect? The map? The restrictions on Palestinian activities in Area C? Israeli investment and settlement in Area C? If none of it was wrong, whether we like B’Tselem or not is not really relevant to their point, is it? Re ‘done deal’ – here’s an Australian program with Daniela Weiss on the subject. I guess she might be wrong.)

     They’re wrong (or perhaps it’s just you) because it’s clearly not a done deal.  The presence of Jews in the area does not equal annexation, at least not yet.  I’m particularly questioning their inference but independently of that, I note that they have been criticized for inaccurate analysis in the past (see the page that I linked to).  Also, I added a link that shows that the Palestinians in Area C haven’t exactly been sitting back twiddling their thumbs when it comes to illegal building.

    I think the reality of annexation dawned on many Israelis when they ultimately discovered that Arafat was not interested in a solution to the conflict that didn’t also involve the final solution of Israel.

    As for Daniela Weiss, if I found all the parts of the program where she was speaking, she was saying that she doesn’t want a Palestinian state to be created.  I already knew that.  Yes, such beliefs might tend to lead to annexation but to say that this is certain to happen is speculation.  On the other hand, such views might also lead to the sort of unilateral withdrawal that Michael Oren has proposed.

    • #10
  11. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Bryan G. Stephens:It should do whatever it takes to be secure. 

     Funny, I think this is what Russia thinks it is doing. Now I don’t happen to like the Russian’s as much as I like Israelis, but Israel is setting up a bad precedent here, and forcing it’s friends into hypocritical stances. I can’t oppose Russian annexation of Crimea and potential invasion and annexation of Easter Ukraine and just blithely say Israel can do whatever it think is best with regards to the West Bank. Unilateral annexation of parts of the west bank would strike me as completely unacceptable, heck Israel is already on thin ice with respect to it’s settlements in the region. How are they any different from Russia on this point? 

    • #11
  12. The Party of Hell No! Inactive
    The Party of Hell No!
    @ThePartyofHellNo

    I think this idea of annexing is a brilliant plan! But then again I always have thought someone claiming the same property as you, or claiming your property always can be moved through incentives – money talks. In this case annexing stirs the pot (Kind of like starting to build on disputed land tends to stimulate the entrenched.). The reason this is being proposed at this time, is really not about John Kerry, it is about the Jewish people waking from a slumber imposed on themselves. It is the awaking of the Jewish mind set from victims to leaders. Look, look, look at the world around you! All the power is gone; all was not as it seemed! All the Arab/Muslim dictators are gone and it’s replacement is chaos, disorder, infighting terrorism, uncivil behavior and eternal rubble. Where is the shining light now? In Damascus, Cairo, Tripoli, Tehran, Beirut? Even the oligarchy of Saudi Arabia is talking to you. Who in the Arab world can be expected to backup the Palestinians and their claim to Israel ‘s land?  Which Arab nation with it’s competing oligarchies, terrorist organizations and little tyrants can divide their power between consolidating and holding power while berating Israel. This is the Arab spring – the rise of the shining, stable, strong, civil, democratic, prosperous Jewish state. Separate and wholly by itself amongst the rubble of the little tyrants. It has even broken free from self serving American presidents, secretary of states and United States State Department. Who of the European Nations can lay claim to criticize and berate Israel for seeking stability and security with the neighboring Palestinians when the European Nations with their panties in a bunch fall all over themselves over the little tyrant Vladamir Putin strutting his stuff one nation over freely annexing lands. Where are the strongly worded  denunciations and boycotts of Russian oil and gas? The refusal to do business with the aggressor Russia? Is your adversary also so blind as not to see the Arab nations never had their back, and used them as their pawns to appear more than they were; they are not going to now, or in the future rise out of the rubble and come back to restrain Israel. Are the Palestinian people also so blind as to realize their leaders were never about securing security, sovereignty, civil society, land , and peace, but about themselves and hatred? Israel, go make your way as a world leader.  Do not fear the words of the failed nations of the west and Arab world, their sting has been lost by their illegitimacy to criticize.

    • #12
  13. Group Captain Mandrake Inactive
    Group Captain Mandrake
    @GroupCaptainMandrake

    Judith Levy, Ed.:

    A Hebrew video with subtitles in multiple languages that the Jerusalem and Diaspora affairs minister released explained why the plan could be practical. It says that the international community does not recognize Israel’s annexation of eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, so annexing part of the West Bank would just add another thing for the world to complain about. 

     Is this the video?

    From 3:10 – “And what will the world say (UN calls on the cell phone)?   The world doesn’t recognize Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem or over the Golan Heights.  So it’s possible to add to the list the annexation of Area C (writes ‘Israeli Sovereignty over Area C’).”  

    • #13
  14. Group Captain Mandrake Inactive
    Group Captain Mandrake
    @GroupCaptainMandrake

    Bennett’s calculus relies upon:

    1. No improvement in the terminal state of negotiations.
    2. The reaction of the rest of the world to an Israeli annexation being limited to cries of “foul” or “offside”.

    Belief in 1. is quite compelling based on prior history.  Belief in 2. is, to my mind, somewhat dangerous.  I would hesitate to extrapolate from the reaction of most of the world to Syria, Crimea and the increasing delusion over Iran that the proposal of Mr. Bennett, if pursued, would lead only to the traditional empty statements about “restraint”, “intransigence” etc..

    • #14
  15. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Valiuth:

    Bryan G. Stephens:It should do whatever it takes to be secure.

    Funny, I think this is what Russia thinks it is doing. Now I don’t happen to like the Russian’s as much as I like Israelis, but Israel is setting up a bad precedent here, and forcing it’s friends into hypocritical stances. I can’t oppose Russian annexation of Crimea and potential invasion and annexation of Easter Ukraine and just blithely say Israel can do whatever it think is best with regards to the West Bank. Unilateral annexation of parts of the west bank would strike me as completely unacceptable, heck Israel is already on thin ice with respect to it’s settlements in the region. How are they any different from Russia on this point?

     Oh Please! Israel is not a thugocracy and Russia is.

    That is no different than “Hey you people invaded Iraq!”.

    Save worring about hypocritical stances for the Left.

    • #15
  16. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Oh Please! Israel is not a thugocracy and Russia is.That is no different than “Hey you people invaded Iraq!”.Save worring about hypocritical stances for the Left.

     Well as a non-thuggish regime I would expect Israel not to engage in naked land grabs like Russia does. If they do they put us and our friendship in a bad spot. Russia can make all sort of claims for Crimea (and has) and unlike Israel they even have a “vote” justifying their annexation. My point is this. We are now engaged in a confrontation with Russia over the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. If we want to save the Ukraine and Eastern Europe from further Russian aggression we need keep together the herd of cats that comprises the Western World. Russia is engaged in full scale rhetorical war to undermine western solidarity on this. 

    Israel engaging in unilateral annexation, would put us on the spot. Do we ignore their annexation or condemn it? To ignore it would be to give fuel to the Russian’s and increase risk to Easter Europe. To condemn it means to break our friendship with Israel.

    • #16
  17. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Flipping Ignore it. Has Israel just exported the people in the occupied territories to their Arab brothers in the first place, they would not be in this mess now.

    The two are not related. One is Russia and one is Israel. They do not have to be treated as if they are the same. It is apples and oranges.

    The rest of the Western World would easily fall in behind our leadership, if we had any.

    • #17
  18. user_82762 Inactive
    user_82762
    @JamesGawron

    Judith,

    I don’t know about the momentary politics of this idea but Naftali Bennett’s plan is making sense for the long run.  The plan makes a rational partition of the West Bank with Jewish majority population and Arab majority populations seperated.  His analysis is also right in that politically the ideological obsessions about the so called Palestinians will never allow this kind of thing to occur by negotiation.  A unilateral action by Israel may actually be the only way for this job to be done.

    Only one thing stands in their way.  Barach Hussein Obama.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #18
  19. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Bryan G. Stephens:Flipping Ignore it. Has Israel just exported the people in the occupied territories to their Arab brothers in the first place, they would not be in this mess now.The two are not related. One is Russia and one is Israel. They do not have to be treated as if they are the same. It is apples and oranges.The rest of the Western World would easily fall in behind our leadership, if we had any.

    Why would it be right for us to ignore it? Israel’s claims to the West Bank are highly disputed. Not just by the Palestinians but by other allies of ours. Our goal in leading the Western world isn’t to carve it up as it suits us, but to institute strong and lasting principles for international behavior so as to foster peace and stability.

    In the past one of the principle disruptions of international peace was territorial instability created by nations expanding their borders through military means. Basically, if we are to have a thriving modern world we can’t allow any nation to unilaterally redraw borders. This principle is as much to the benefit of Israel as it is to any nations. It is on this principle that we are fighting for Ukraine against Russian belligerence. Annexation by Israel of any part of the West Bank I think goes against this general idea. If we are to lead the world we should lead it fairly.

    Why would it be fair or just to let Israel annex over half of the West Bank?

    • #19
  20. Manfred Arcane Inactive
    Manfred Arcane
    @ManfredArcane

    @Valiuth

    A lot of the problems of modern day seems to issue from national borders seeming to have been set somewhat irrationally.  The Kurds come to mind.

    Ralph Peters offered up a redrawn map of the Middle East recently where he reconfigured borders so as to reduce ethnic/cultural maladies that afflict the modern world.  These adjustments are unlikely to occur through negotiation (witness Turks’ reaction to creation of Kurdistan), hence the argument for the second best solution, de-facto realignment of borders.

    • #20
  21. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Valiuth:Why would it be fair or just to let Israel annex over half of the West Bank?

     Because they won it in a war. Like we did California.

    Israel was attacked, with her enemies being intent on her total destruction and the death of her people. Israel fought back and won. Those are the spoils of war.

    “Fair” is not a concept that makes sense in relationships between nations. All that matters is power. Russia does not care what is “fair”. The Arab world does not care what is “fair”.

    Besides, Israel is not redrawing borders unilaterally. The borders are already there.

    • #21
  22. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    anonymous:

    I’ve long thought that a realist, utilitarian strategy for Israel might be event-driven annexation of territory. Every time there’s a terrorist attack within the borders of Israel or against a settler, every time a rocket is launched toward Israel from these territories (whether intercepted or not, and regardless of casualties), the borders of Israel are redrawn outward by, say, 10 cm to ten metres per incident, depending upon its seriousness. Let the barbarians work out how long they can continue their savagery before they’ll be pushed across a border into somewhere which is even worse. Given the power, they would do the same to Israel in a moment.

    And when they demand their murderous terrorists be released? Fine: 15 metres advance of the border each. How many would you like?

    John, I like the way you think!

    • #22
  23. Manfred Arcane Inactive
    Manfred Arcane
    @ManfredArcane

    anonymous:

    I’ve long thought that a realist, utilitarian strategy for Israel might be event-driven annexation of territory. Every time there’s a terrorist attack within the borders of Israel or against a settler, every time a rocket is launched toward Israel from these territories (whether intercepted or not, and regardless of casualties), the borders of Israel are redrawn outward by, say, 10 cm to ten metres per incident, depending upon its seriousness. Let the barbarians work out how long they can continue their savagery before they’ll be pushed across a border into somewhere which is even worse. Given the power, they would do the same to Israel in a moment.

    And when they demand their murderous terrorists be released? Fine: 15 metres advance of the border each. How many would you like?

     Mr. Walker,

    I broached this idea about a month ago here on Ricochet, using almost the same logic (and took a lot of flack from some Ricos too, I might add).  I think when two giant minds align like this, it may have the same consequences as when all the planets align.  Watch out folks!

    • #23
  24. Manfred Arcane Inactive
    Manfred Arcane
    @ManfredArcane

    Of course, I didn’t express the idea quite as clearly, now that I think back in retrospect…

    • #24
  25. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Valiuth:

    Why would it be right for us to ignore it? Israel’s claims to the West Bank are highly disputed. Not just by the Palestinians but by other allies of ours. Our goal in leading the Western world isn’t to carve it up as it suits us, but to institute strong and lasting principles for international behavior so as to foster peace and stability. 

    Handsome is as handsome does : – (

    • #25
  26. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Group Captain Mandrake:

    As for Daniela Weiss, if I found all the parts of the program where she was speaking, she was saying that she doesn’t want a Palestinian state to be created. I already knew that.  

    No, the part when the reporter asked her if the settlements were planned and placed in such a way as to prevent a Palestinian State being created  and she said yes, and then confirmed that she had discussed this many times with Ariel Sharon, while he was PM, and while the settlements were expanding.  She indicated that he agreed and cooperated with the settlers to achieve this goal.

    You may be right that their presence will not stop a Palestinian State from coming into being on the West Bank, but it will certainly make it much harder.  (They’ve certainly hamstrung Palestinian economic development on the West Bank by stopping Palestinian [but not Israeli] construction in Area C – which often starts right at the edge of towns.)  Whether that is good or bad for the Palestinians and for Israel in the long run really remains to be seen.

    • #26
  27. KingsKnight1 Inactive
    KingsKnight1
    @KingsKnight1

    The Oslo Accords were signed in 1993. If the Palestinians had shown any sign of being serious about a peace settlement this state of affairs would never have been reached. But given that the PA has never made any offer of compromise, why shouldn’t Israel put pressure on them by solidifying control of the land? No, the Palestinians made this bed. They should lie in it.

    • #27
  28. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Valiuth:Why would it be fair or just to let Israel annex over half of the West Bank?

    “Fair” is not a concept that makes sense in relationships between nations. All that matters is power. Russia does not care what is “fair”. The Arab world does not care what is “fair”.

    Israel started the 1967 war by attacking first. You do know that right? But, that is beside the point.

    The problem with Russia is that it takes the view that all that matters is power. If all that matters between nations is power then there can be no forms of international laws or agreements that mean anything. Worse yet, why should this be only true between nation’s, why not between individuals. If all that matters is power then all human rights are meaningless. So there you have it I guess the great dividing line between freedom and tyranny. To believe that power is the single arbiter of right and wrong, just and unjust is to vote for tyranny.

    • #28
  29. rico Inactive
    rico
    @rico

    KingsKnight1:

    The Oslo Accords were signed in 1993. If the Palestinians had shown any sign of being serious about a peace settlement this state of affairs would never have been reached. But given that the PA has never made any offer of compromise, why shouldn’t Israel put pressure on them by solidifying control of the land? No, the Palestinians made this bed. They should lie in it.

     I agree with this. The Palestinians have not ever negotiated in good faith, and there is no reason to believe that they are the slightest bit interested in doing so for the foreseeable future. It’s time for Isreal to take charge of the situation. There is no better solution (although, I’ve got to say that anonymous’s approach does have a lot of appeal).

    • #29
  30. Vice-Potentate Inactive
    Vice-Potentate
    @VicePotentate

    What is Israel’s endgame? Annex C and gradually integrate population centers or Annex C and allow for a noncontinuous highly populated Palestinian autonomy? I think the annexation of territory is a gauntlet is thrown down forbidding a permanent Palestinian state. It seems to me that this would be the primary reason for Israel’s restraint in the matter, as it upsets a tenuous equilibrium.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.