When Will the Palestinians Make ‘Painful Concessions’ for Peace?
During her visit to Israel on July 16, at meetings held with Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton pushed Israel to make gestures to strengthen the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, according to Israeli press reports. Once again, the Obama administration is expecting Israel to make concessions that would entice the Palestinian president to return to the negotiating table, but what about parity? What concessions, painful or otherwise, have the Palestinians been pushed to make?
Should Abbas be bribed monetarily by the Obama administration and its western allies to return to “peace” negotiations? Will he be willing to compromise on the Palestinian right of return, or on recognizing Israel as the Jewish homeland? The answer is no.
Addressing a joint session of the U.S. Congress on May 24, 2011, Benjamin Netanyahu declared that “We must… find a way to forge a lasting peace with the Palestinians, and that will mean painful concessions on Israel’s part that include ceding some places that are part of the Jewish homelands.” The Palestinian response came fast and furious from Nabil Shaath, a top aide to Mahmoud Abbas. Shaath told the Associated Press that the outlines of the peace deal described by Netanyahu constituted a “declaration of war.”
What exactly did Netanyahu propose that constituted, according to Shaath, a “declaration of war”? Netanyahu said that “Jerusalem must never again be divided. Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel.” Netanyahu also alluded to President Obama’s statement that “Israel’s borders after any peace agreement will be different than they were before the 1967 war.” Netanyahu proceeded to explain that the reason a peace agreement hasn’t been struck between Israel and the Palestinians is that the other side is “unwilling to accept a Palestinian state if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it.” Netanyahu added: “It is time for the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to stand before his people and say ‘I will accept a Jewish state.’”
According to the AP, Shaath said that Netanyahu’s proposal ignores the Israeli-Arab borders that existed before the 1967 war — lines that Shaath alleged President Obama delineated in May 2011.
One principle features of a two-state solution is the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. Another is providing Israel with secure, i.e., strategic, if not historical, boundaries. That was the spirit and essence of UNSC Resolution 242, which premised “territories (not all) for peace.” However, it was an agreement directed at the Arab states and Israel, as the Palestinians were not even a party to it. Nowhere did UNSC Resolution 242 compel Israel to return to the June 4, 1967, borders; moreover, it conditioned Israeli withdrawal from captured territories on an Arab peace agreement and recognition of Israel. Both Egypt and Jordan made peace with Israel and received all the captured territories. It is interesting to note that in 1988, Jordan turned responsibility for negotiating the future of the West Bank over to the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).
The Oslo Accords, which were signed at the White House lawn in 1993, specified a gradual return of Israeli-held territory to the PLO with Area A (Palestinian cities and towns) under full Palestinian control, Area B (rural areas) under Palestinian civil control and Israeli military control, and Area C (Israeli settlements with 350,000 Jews, and a sparsely populated area with less than 50,000 Palestinians) under full Israeli control. It further conditioned gradual Israeli withdrawal on the Palestinian Authority ceasing its murderous incitement against Israel and Jews in the mosques, media, and educational system. The Accords also called for mutual recognition and the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. And it demanded that the PA eradicate the terrorist infrastructure and maintain a police force not an army.
Sadly there is no end in sight for this conflict.
http://uselections2012blog.blogspot.ca/
There is detail missing here, the document called “The Khartoum Resolution of 1967″ issuing its 3 No’s:
1. NO peace with Israel
2. NO recognition of Israel
3. NO negotiations with Israel
See: http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_khartoum.php
No one will ever make demands of them Palestinians.the global community prefers to berate the Jews. Regarding the Oslo syndrome,most israelis understand the. Implacable hatred the Muslims/palesinian/Arabs have for them.this is why the left in Israel is concentrating on economic issues and not the peace process. The israelis are hoping to outwait the obamination
and impending European collapse rather than grant more unreciprocated concessions
Peace? Why should the Palestinians make concessions for peace? Peace would legitimize the existence of Israel. The existence of an independent Palestinian state would legitimize the existence of Israel.
The Palestinians do want a state, to be sure. But it is much more important to them to make sure Israel never is accepted.
http://www.jochnowitz.net/Essays/Palestinians.html
it’s ridiculous to keep asking more and more of Israel when the Palestinians aren’t expected to do anything at all. but of course, there’s no need for them to.
Obama just overrode Congress again and is making sure the Pals get upwards of $200 million this year. you may recall that Obama also made several demands on the Israelis about settlements and borders that were stronger than what Abbas had been asking for. why should the PA negotiate when Obama is doing it all for them?
take the vile anti-western and anti-Semitic textbooks our tax dollars are paying for. you’d think that would be enough to get people to take another look at the “victimized” Palestinians, and the endless sums of money they require to continue their campaign of martyrdom and endless war. apparently not.
When compelled to on pain of extinction.
Your readers need to check for themselves just what the Government of Israel are doing to the Palestinian community in the occupied territories.
Look at the website of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
http://www.icahd.org and see just how many homes have been destroyed.
At the present time 8 villages are about to be destroyed and the Palestinian population forceably moved from thier homes which they have occupied for genaerations
Many statements in this report are incomplete or are inaccurate
James, London, UK
You wouldn’t be suggesting that illegal settlements should be considered according to settlers’ religion or ethnic origin, would you?
Did anyone notice that the “Israel must make some painful this or that” theory is consistent with the GUTR (Grand Unified Theory of Redistribution) which is based on the childish notion that the wrongs of the world are to be fixed by taking from the successful for the benefit of the irresponsible?
When this fallacy is finally discredited, maybe we will see some progress in the Muiddle East?
To answer the question directly – “never”…..
The Palestinian leadership and the people they “lead” suffer from an entitlement complex the size of moon….
Isn’t it obvious the Palestinians do not now and have never wanted peach with Israel…Its all a ploy to destroy Israel. The same as Obumbo and his ilk are a ploy to destroy America’s Constitutional Republic…with a lot of help from the Big Gov. Republicans (RINOS).
The more painful concessions and unilateral ‘goodwill jestures’ Israel makes the Israeli position less valid and legitimate.
It is painful for me to see how the Jews keep negotiating with themselves while the arabs sit back and laugh, and allow the world to pummel the Jews into submission.
awful
There are two ways to make someone accede to a demand they would not otherwise: persuasion and force. Persuasion has been tried way past the point where it can plausibly be claimed to be sensible. If you give, and give, and give, and are only ever attacked in return, then it is folly to continue. At this point, the other tack needs to be taken: punishment and coercion. From a military standpoint, the balance of force between the Israelis and ‘Palestinians’ is so asymmetrical that there is nothing other than a misplaced sense of civilisation that is preventing a massive counter-strike. This is madness. History has shown, over and over again that the only thing Moslem aggressors respond to is military defeat and the death of their forces. Tours in 732 AD, the 1492 Reconquista, Lepanto in 1571, the lifting of the Siege of Vienna in 1683, the Barbary Wars, Omdurman in 1898; all of these victories required the destruction of barbarian forces. The Israelis should look at history to see how to confront Islam: not with concessions and accommodation, but with the sword. The next time a rocket is fired into Israel, march a regiment of MLRS launchers to the border and depopulate a square km of Gaza. Seal the border. Turn off the power and water. Shoot captured smugglers out of hand. Instead of handing back dozens of prisoners in exchange for a kidnapped soldier, execute them. If Hezbollah tries anything, do the same to Southern Lebanon. What’s the rest of the world going to do? Israel needs to say, “very well, then: alone.”